“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

Balubhai Kikabhai Patel, Valsad vs. Principal Commisioner of Income Tax, Valsad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 461/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.461/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Balubhhai Kikabhai Patel Principal Commissioner Of बनाम/ Nahuli, Karmbele, Umbergon, Income-Tax, Valsad, Room No. Vs. Surat-396 105 301, 3Rd Floor, Palak Arcade, Shanti Nagar, Tithal Road, Valsad-396 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Akqpp 2563 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 13/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/05/2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 68

relied on the decision in cases of Malabar Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 243 ITR 83 (SC) and held that there is a escapement of income of Rs.39,69,578/- (Rs.44,10,642 – Rs.4,41,064/-) and short levy of tax of Rs.30,66,499/-. He held that the AO passed

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Rosha Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Mandi Gobindgarh

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,

ITA 923/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21

Section 148BSection 151

Rs.29,99,030 was never claimed by the assessee in the profit and loss account and, therefore, could not have resulted in any escapement of income. The approving authority failed to appreciate that if the Cenvat credit was not debited to the profit and loss account, there could ... reported in 161 taxman 609in which, the notice u/s 148 was quashed for the reason, in as much as, in the notice stating escaping of income was mentioned as 42858.47 crore, whereas, in the order u/s 148A(d), it was mentioned as 12431.99 crore and, there was no explanation about

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Rosha Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Mandi Gobindgarh

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,

ITA 922/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2019-20

Section 148BSection 151

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Rosha Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Mandi Gobindgarh

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,

ITA 921/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Section 148BSection 151

Rosha Alloys P Limited, Amloh Road, Village Turan, Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Ludhiana, Punjab

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,

ITA 888/CHANDI/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-2019

Section 148BSection 151

Sh. Sanjeev Garg, Panchkula vs. Pr. C.I.T., Panchkula

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 365/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 365/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Sanjeev Garg, Vs The Pcit, House No. 77, Sector 4, Panchkula. Panchkula. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afopg5637A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.05.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 127Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

case for scrutiny. However, in revenue potential cases, it was further provided that 'Complete Scrutiny' could be conducted, if there was potential escapement of income above a prescribed monetary limit, subject to the approval of administrative Pr. CIT/CIT/Pr. DIT/DIT. ………………….” A.Y.2017-18 8 9.1 A perusal of the Instruction would indicate that

Vaishali Keshav Kulkarni, Pune vs. ITO Ward 13(2), Pune

In the result the Grounds Numbers 2, 3 and 4 raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 540/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.540/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vaishali Keshav Kulkarni, Flat No.3, Hermes Grandstand Society, Kavade Maal Sopan Baug, Pune Cantt East So., Pune 411001. Pan: Atjpk4884A Appellant/ Assessee V The Income Tax Officer, S Ward-13(2), Pune. Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kartik Natrajan – Ca/Ar Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 13.12.2024 For Assessment Year 2015-16 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Dated 05/03/2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250

that any income has escaped assessment. All that the Assessing Officer desires is examination of certain details pertaining to the actual extent of escapement of income which can be established only after detailed investigation. Even in the reasons recorded, it says " In this case as per the CIB information

Ajay Goel, Legal Heir of Late Manju Goel, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2450/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2450/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Ajay Goel (Legal Heir Of Late Manju Goel),…Appellant Flat 4H, 4Th Floor, Lake Plaza, 277, Jessore Road, Lake Town, Kolkata-700048 [Pan:Adcpg2207N] -Vs.- Assessing Officer,…………..……….…………...Respondent National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: March 10, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

under section 148 was issued on 31.03.2021. Therefore, admittedly the proceedings were initiated under section 148 of the Act for reassessment relating to escapement of income of late Manju Goel and such proceedings as has been initiated in the year 2020-21. Now the question before me is whether proceedings

Bachu Rama Krishnamurthy, Tumkur vs. ITO Ward 2, Tumkur

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

ITA 399/BANG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kupendra Setty, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advoce – Stnading

Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reopening did not refer to any specific document or evidence found during the course of the survey that could substantiate the claim of escapement of income. Thus, in the absence of such tangible material, the proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act are bad in law and liable ... details were already disclosed in the return, and no fresh or tangible material has been brought on record by the Revenue to demonstrate escapement of income, I hold that the reopening of the assessment was without valid jurisdiction. Consequently, the assessment framed under section 143(3) read with section

Aashiyana Infrastructure Development Private Limited, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3033/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahmanaashiyana Infrastructure Development Vs. Ito, Ward 1 (2), Private Limited, Delhi. Plot No.830, Near Asian Hospital, Sector 21A, Faridabad – 121 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aafca2236A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Advocate Shri Shivam Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2025 Date Of Order : 28.05.2025 O R D E R 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 24.04.2024 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2012-13 On 28.09.2012 Declaring Income Of Rs.31,22,410/- Which Was Revised On 21.09.2013 At An Income Of Rs.22,16,310/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

where assessment u/s 143(3) made, no action under this section shall be undertaken after four years unless there is escapement of income by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to file return u/s 139 or 142(1) or 148 or to disclose fully or truly ... before us, I observed that the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) and the Assessing Officer has no doubt recorded the reasons for escapement of income, however failed to record the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts fully and truly. 8. The issue under consideration

Manapuram Finance Ltd, Thrissur vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 145/COCH/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2015-16 Manappuram Finance Ltd., Acit, Circle-1(1) Iv/470A(Old), Thrissur W638A(New), Vs. Manappuram House, Valapad P.O. Thrissur-680567 Pan : Aabcm6882E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr (Heard In Hybrid Bench) Date Of Hearing : 26-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

gold loans, given in the profits declared. It was found that non-accounting of accrued interest for income tax purposes has resulted in escapement of income for Rs. 88.17 Cr. Secondly, in the assessment, the assessee made provision for Non Performing Assets amounting to Rs.2,19,50,000/-included

Akshat Loyalka, Jaipur vs. Rjn-C-(101)(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 1019/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 May 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 234ASection 250Section 5Section 69A

such action is taken the requirements of the law should be satisfied. دو 1.2 The belief of the officer should be as to escapement of income and the belief should not be a product of imagination or speculation as further discussed in the ensuing paras. 1.3 Further, the belief must ... existing provisions of law. 1.3 A bare reading of the proviso to Sec 149(1)(b) clearly indicate that the alleged escaped taxable income must be Rs.50 lakh or more then only the benefit of the extended time limit is permissible. Further, the normal limitation period expires on the completion

Rohit Jayantilal Soni, Dahod vs. The ACIT, Circle Intl. Taxation, Vadodara

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

ITA 1800/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 10(100)Section 147Section 80D

hence not offered the income for taxation by filing Return of Income. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment as an escapement of income and added difference between the premium paid and surrender value of Rs. 22,01,977/- as the income of the assessee and demanded tax thereon. 4. Aggrieved

Hemant Gordhanbhai Patel, Nadiad vs. The ACIT, Intl. Taxn., Vadodara

In the result, Ground No. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1684/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divyakant Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 250Section 69

Both the lower authorities erred in law and on facts in initiating and affirming the reassessment proceedings as there was no any escapement of income chargeable to tax when the appellant had made investment in purchase of property from his NRE account funds which facts were very much before them

Kogod Basavaraju Jayachandra, Hassan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result the ITA No

ITA 1618/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri.Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 234A

believe that the particular income of the assessee is escaped income . That is why the AO had reason to believe that there was escapement of income in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, initiation of proceedings under sections 147/148 of the Act is in accordance with law. Further, in respect ... total disclosuremade by Shri. D. S. Nandish. It clearly shows that for ITA Nos.1617 and 1618/Bang/2024 Page 16 of 45 recording reasons for escapement of income on the basis of survey material, there is escapement of income. As confirmed, the survey statement recorded under section 131 of the Act, during

Kogod Basavaraju Jayachandra, Hassan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 1617/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 234A

believe that the particular income of the assessee is escaped income . That is why the AO had reason to believe that there was escapement of income in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, initiation of proceedings under sections 147/148 of the Act is in accordance with law. Further, in respect ... appearing and it is included in the total disclosuremade by Shri. D. S. Nandish. It clearly shows that for recording reasons for escapement of income on the basis of survey material, there is escapement of income. As confirmed, the survey statement recorded under section 131 of the Act, during

Kalpana Vijay Kadam, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 841/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.841/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Kalpana Vijay Kadam, V The Income Tax Officer, Fi 13, Janki Heights, S.No.250, S. Ward-2(2), Pune. Baner D P Road, Aundh, Pune – 411007. Maharashtra. Pan: Axzpk4350P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas P. Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri Manish Mehta – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 06.02.2025 For The A.Y.2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Erred In Passing An Ex-Parte Order Without Affording A Reasonable Opportunity To The Appellant. The Order Was Solely Based On The Observations Of The Assessing Officer (Ao) In The

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

reproduced by the Assessing Officer. Assessee has further submitted that Assessee has obtained Bank Loan. Thus, Assessee has submitted that there is no escapement of income. In spite of that Assessing Officer issued Notice u/s.148 of the Act, for A.Y.2016- 17. Since without prejudice Assessee is Joint Owner with ... Order may be quashed. Even otherwise on merits, Assessee had obtained loan and documents were submitted during assessment proceedings, hence there is no escapement of income. Ld.AR took us through the paper book page no.76 to 79 is the Loan Account Statement for Loan of Rs.55,00,000/-. Ld.AR

Protein Entertainment Pvt Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 591/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 131Section 133A

filing the returns of income. The assessee had also not filed returns of income corresponding to such cash deposits, suggesting possible escapement of income. 26.2 Subsequently, on 24.08.2017, a search was purportedly conducted under section 132, not at the assessee’s residential or business premises, but solely at specific bank ... investigative tool, primarily aimed at discovering facts that may lead to reopening of cases under section 147 of the Act on account of escapement of income. • Powers: Income Tax authorities can enter the business premises during working hours, inspect books of account, verify cash and stock, and record statements. • Limitations

Protein Entertainment Pvt Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 590/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 131Section 133A

Protein Entertainment Pvt Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 589/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 131Section 133A