“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

M/S Fairdeal Information Technology Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Delhi

In the result all the three grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2793/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalm/S Fairdeal Information Income Tax Officer, Technology Private Limited, Ward-9(1), 116A, First Floor, Somdutt Vs. New Delhi. Chamber-1, 5, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066. Pan-Aaacf9581G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca & Shri Ankur Agarwal, Ca Department By Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 13/02/2026

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 68

transactions with M/s Concise Exim Pvt. Ltd. Thereafter, in order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act, AO has recorded the satisfaction of escapement of income that assessee has credits entries of Rs.13,58,00,000/- in its bank account which remained unexplained. Once the earlier notice

M/S Stance Consumer Electronics Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-32, Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 in ITA No

ITA 2792/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.2791 & 2792/Del/2025 (Assessment Yearss 2016-17 & 2017-18)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

accommodation entry. The claim of the assessee was that in the reasons recorded before reopening the assessment u/s 147, satisfaction was recorded of escapement of income to the extent of Rs.39,27,750/- being rotation of money through transactions with M/s Concise Exim Pvt. Ltd. which were alleged as accommodation ... Exim Pvt. Ltd. and based on this allegation, AO concluded that these transaction are rotation of money and, accordingly satisfaction was recorded of escapement of income of the transaction of Rs. 39,27,750/- carried out by the assessee company with M/s Concise Exim Pvt. Ltd. However, from the perusal

M/S Stance Consumer Electronics Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-32, Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 in ITA No

ITA 2791/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.2791 & 2792/Del/2025 (Assessment Yearss 2016-17 & 2017-18)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

DCIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections

ITA 4913/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, (CIT DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)

which was otherwise not allowable as per Explanation-1 of section 115JB of the Act was allowed by the department, resulting in escapement of income. It is trite to cite the relevant extract of the reasons for reopening herein under for ease of reference: “In this case, the assessee filed ... book profit, which has resulted in short computation of Book Profit to the extent of Rs.907,04,11,000/-. Therefore, there is an escapement of income in computing the book profit. 4. Taking into consideration of the above and the data in the Return of Income, the data from

DCIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections

ITA 4869/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, (CIT DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)

Rohit Manchand, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 5(3)(2), Gautam Budh Nagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5124/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 50cSection 54

result, we are inclined to allow the grounds raised by the assessee on the basis of the original ROI that there is no escapement of income in the case of assessee to proceedings u/s 148 that too were initiated beyond 6 years. 10. In the result, appeal filed

Shri Suchha Singh Through L/R Ranjit Singh, Kaputhalla vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jalandhar

ITA 36/ASR/2021[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar11 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Udayan Dasgupta, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Vijh (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Farhat Khan (Ld. CIT) - DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

property was purchased by the assessee and the copy of purchase deed was never available with Ld. AO to support the allegation of escapement of income. There was no material to record to make belief of escapement of income. The reassessment was initiated on mere borrowed satisfaction and therefore

Yata Ramchander, Hyderabad vs. ITO Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1722/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1617 & 1722/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Kesireddy Ravinder Reddy, Uppal, The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad – 500 039. Ward-11(1, Pan Apypk7089Q Vs. Signature Towers, Yata Ramchander, Hyderabad - 500084. Uppal, Hyderabad. Pin -500039. Telangana. Pan Acvpy9822D Telangana. (Appellants) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Mohd Afzal, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 11.02.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri Mohd Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 143(1)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 275

which there is no satisfaction recorded by the AO stating that there is a violation of section 269SS, which caused escapement of income OR concealment of income. in the absence of such a satisfaction by the Assessing Officer in the case of assessee, the learned Commissioner erred in confirming

Kesireddy Ravinder Reddy, Hyderabad vs. ITO Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1617/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.1617 & 1722/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: Sri Mohd Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 143(1)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 275

Nisha Rajendra Mavani Legal Heir of Navnit Dharamsi Parmani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, ground No. 1 to 3 are allowed

ITA 6514/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia(Physical Hearing)

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 254(1)Section 69B

assessee or record or direction the AO to take remedial action for issuing fresh notice on the legal heir of assessee about escapement of income of assessee from assessment, rather again passed the impugned order in the name of deceased assessee. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Savita Kapila

Nileshkumar M Bhalodi, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7/RJT/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Ms Devina Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

total amount of Rs.3,39,83,971/- is found to have been deposited in the bank account of the assessee. It culminated into escapement of income of Rs.3,39,83,971/- as in order u/s 148A(d) of the Act, dated 22.07.2022, resulting in issue of notice

Gulmohar Towers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 976/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

disclose fully and truly all material facts qua the sale of investments. Therefore, there was no tangible material on record which suggests the escapement of income. We observe that there was non-application of independent mind by the Id. AO, lack of rational link between the information received and reasons

DCIT, CC-3, Ludhiana, Kitchlu Nagar vs. Mani Ram Balwant Rai HUF, Civil Lines

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1043/CHANDI/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT DR

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 145(3)Section 28Section 69C

assessment. 13.7 Drawing this analogy to the current regime, it is evident that when a search takes place and information is unearthed suggesting escapement of income, the Assessing Officer must act under section 148 (which now performs the role formerly assigned to section 153A) rather than continuing with a pending ... significant amendments to section 147 and section 148, along with the insertion of Explanations 1 and 2, and the concept of "information suggesting escapement of income" was explicitly defined. From the reading of Explanation 2 to Section 147, it is evident that in cases where a search is initiated

Hasmukh Ugarchand Gadhecha, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 591/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.591/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Hasmukh Ugarchand The Ito बनाम/ Gadhecha, Huf Ward-5(2)(2) V/S. 3Rd Floor, Anjalee House Ahmedabad – 380 015 Cg Road Navrangpura Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaahg 7194 K (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak R. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 26/12/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-2014. 2. The Assessee, In This Appeal, Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Hasmukh Ugarchand Gadhecha, Huf Vs. Ito Asstt.Year : 2013-14 2 “1. That The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Law & In The Facts Of The Case In Confirming The Order Of The Ao In Reopening Assessment U/S.147 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68Section 69C

consideration has escaped assessment within the meaning sec. 147 of the IT. Act. 6. Basis of forming reasons to believe and details of escapement of income: From the detailed discussion made above, it is very clear that the assessee has purchased/sold 83500 shares of Sawaca and received pay-in/pay-out

Income Tax Officer Ward 7.2.1 Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Raghavbhai Gordhanbhai Narola, Ahmedabad

Appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed, whereas, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1268/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Sinh, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)(a)Section 148Section 250

tallied with I.T. Form No. 26AS. Hence the amount of Rs. 1,73,94,080/- being suspicious high value transaction escaped the income of A.Y. 2013-14 as claimed by you in your letter is totally incorrect, far from (acts, misinterpreted and misunderstood without going through the financial statements ... tallied with I.T. Form No. 26AS. Hence the amount of Rs. 1,61,75,577/- being suspicious high value transaction escaped the income of A.Y. 2013-14 as claimed by you in your letter is totally incorrect, far from (acts, misinterpreted and misunderstood without going through the financial statements

Income Tax Officer Ward 7.2.1 Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Raghavbhai Gordhanbhai Narola, Ahmedabad

Appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed, whereas, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1267/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Sinh, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)(a)Section 148Section 250

Income Tax Officer, Ward 7.2.1, Ahmedabad vs. Raghavbhai Gordhanbhai Narola, Ahmedabad

Appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed, whereas, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1266/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Sinh, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)(a)Section 148Section 250

Choksi Ranchhodlal Kishordas, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 558/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: us, A.Y. 2013-14, in the case of the assessee. According to the Ld. PCIT, the reasons for which the case of the assessee was reopened was not properly inquired into by the AO and, therefore, the assessment order, according to him, was erroneous causing prejudice to the Revenue for not having made any addition on account of income which was believed to have escaped assessment in the case of the assessee. The reopening, it transpires, was resorted to on finding that the assessee had received

For Appellant: Shri Rushin Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

well as VAT audit report were already submitted during the course of original assessment proceedings. This clearly substantiates that there is no escapement of income and the belief formed by your goodself based in general information is not a valid reason to believe as required u/s.147

L Karuppusamy, Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore

ITA 224/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1119, 1120 & 1121/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.209 To 213 & 214/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2014-15 & 2016-17

specific reference to paragraph 23, wherein it was held that a satisfaction note which is general, vague, and casual, without recording particulars of escapement of income, quantification thereof, or linkage to a specific assessment year, reflects lack of proper application of mind and is therefore bad in law, rendering

P Kuppuchamy, Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore

ITA 223/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1119, 1120 & 1121/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.209 To 213 & 214/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2014-15 & 2016-17 Mr. P. Palanisamy, 390, P.P. Nilayam, 9Th Main I Cross, Hal Ii Stage, Indira Nagar, Bengaluru-560 038. [Pan:Adspp 9150 F] (अपीलाथ/Appellant) V. The Acit, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.219, 220, 221 & 222/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2010-11, 2017-18 & 2018-19 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.200, 201 To 208/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2011-12 To 2018-19 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3388 To 3392/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 M/S. P.P. Financers, 24, Radha Avenue, 3Rd Street, Valsaravakkam, Chennai-600 087. [Pan: Aahfp 0288 L] (अपीलाथ/Appellant) V. The Acit, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.215 To 218 & 223/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2018-19 & 2014-15 Mr. P. Kuppuchamy, No.80/7, 17Th Cross, 16Th Main Road, Btm Layout, Ns Palya, Bangaluru-560 076. V. The Acit, Central Circle-3, Coimbatore.