← All Phrases

“income escaping assessment”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 1471,518 judgments

The decision most relied on for income escaping assessment is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), cited in 1,673 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on income escaping assessment

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 income escaping assessment

Hitesh Jitendra Parikh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-5(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2370/MUM/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Biren Gabhawala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 271(1)

learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the contention of the Assessing Officer that as per section 149(1), if income escaping assessment is Rs.1,00,000/- or more, then the time limit for issuing notice u/s 148 is 6 years from the end of the assessment year

M/S. Global Arkitekts Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Circle - 2 (2), Chennai

ITA 708/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) &For Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

submissions, has submitted that AO had tangible and specific information from records / other wings of the department resulting into formation of reasons about income escaping assessment. On merits, Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee did not carry out any agricultural operations and no income was admitted on this account ... sale agreement with M/s Shoreline Development Ltd. (SDL) for sale of the land for Rs.26.68 Crores. Accordingly, forming a belief that the income escaped assessment, Ld. AO proceeded to reopen the case for this year and issued notice u/s 148 which was served on 31.03.2016. Thus, the reopening was done

Tata Motors Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (Ltu), Mumbai

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

ITA 7543/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

stood prior to such substitutions. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed to confer jurisdiction under section 147(a) two conditions were required to be satisfied

Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai vs. The Tata Finance Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 7359/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

stood prior to such substitutions. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed to confer jurisdiction under section 147(a) two conditions were required to be satisfied

Dy.Comm of Income Tax Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Arch Pharmalabs Ltd, Mumbai

In the result of the Revenue Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1722/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.1722/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dy. Comm Of Income M/S. Arch Pharmalabs Tax Central Circle Ltd Mumbai 5(1) Mumbai 3Rdfloor, Titanic Bldg, बिधम/ Room No.1928, Chandivali Farm Road, Vs. 19Th Floor, Air India Bldg. Malegaon, Nariman Point, Mumbai Maharashtra 400072 Maharashtra,400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No Aaccm0306Q (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ : Shri Madhur Agarwal Appellant By प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent : Shri. Manoj Sinha, Sr.Ar. By सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 20.10.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri. Manoj Sinha, Sr.AR
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

made without any tangible material coming on record having live link nexus with the 13 I.T.A. No. 1722/Mum/2022 M/s Arch pharmalabs Ltd. income escaping assessment. The entire substratum and premise of the AO was wrong and the material and information as discussed in the reasons recorded have no link with

M/S. Gita Refractories Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 11(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 81/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pavan Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR), ITAT, Bangalore
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 151

same has issued notice u/s148 for reopening the assessment. Before proceeding further we will look at the provisions of section 147 Income escaping assessment 147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject

ITO 24(2), Mumbai vs. Kailash Chandra Gupta HUF, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2011–

ITA 2339/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 250

absence in the reason of any amount being determined by the Assessing officer as having escaped assessment. This prima facie determination of income escaping assessment would indicate application of mind to arrive at the reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.” 14. Further, from the perusal

Income Tax Officer 24(2) (1), Mumbai vs. Kailash Chandra Gupta, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2011–

ITA 2338/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 250

absence in the reason of any amount being determined by the Assessing officer as having escaped assessment. This prima facie determination of income escaping assessment would indicate application of mind to arrive at the reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.” 14. Further, from the perusal

DCIT, Chennai vs. B.V.Reddy Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1914/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1914/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. B.V. Reddy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, New No. 21/Old No. 10A, First Floor, Corporate Circle 1(2), Umayal Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 010. [Pan:Aaccn2252L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04.11.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, Dated 29.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-11 On 13.10.2010 Admitting Total Income Of ₹.15,50,25,060/-. The Assessing Officer Has Completed The Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

have been discovered by the AO'. In the instant case, the question of producing the books of accounts and finding out where any income escaped assessment does not arise at all. The basic fact under which head income was be assessed was already reflected not only in the Profit ... purpose of the section. To this limited extent, the action of the Income-tax Officer in starting proceedings in respect of income escaping assessment is open to challenge in a court of law.” 8. After considering various case law including the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

Dy CIT, CC-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Holding P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the cross-objection are allowed, and both the appeals are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 126/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11
Section 92A(2)(j)

recorded, may not necessarily prove escapement of income at the stage of recording the reasons, such reasons must point out to an income escaping assessment and not merely need for an inquiry which may result in detection of an income escaping assessment. 8. Let us in this light revert

Dy CIT, CC-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Holding P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the cross-objection are allowed, and both the appeals are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 125/MUM/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 92A(2)(j)

recorded, may not necessarily prove escapement of income at the stage of recording the reasons, such reasons must point out to an income escaping assessment and not merely need for an inquiry which may result in detection of an income escaping assessment. 8. Let us in this light revert

DCIT 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Satya Securities Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6670/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal a/wFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Mane a/w
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

case and the assessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of information received from CBI. Learned DR further submitted that not mentioning of income escaping assessment in the reasons would not vitiate the reassessment proceedings. 9. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record

DCIT 13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Pebble Bay Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the application of the assessee under rule 27 is ...

ITA 5744/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- M/S Pebble Bay Developers Tax-13(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Room No. 218, Vs. Raheja Chambers, Linking Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Road, Main Avenue Santacruz Mumbai-400020. (West), Mumbai-400054. Pan No. Aaccg 1645 E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Vranda Matkari, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Nishit Gandhi, Ar Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda Matkari, DR
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 69C

much less any income escaping any income chargeable to tax much less any income escaping any income chargeable to tax much less any income escaping assessment from tax. assessment from tax. ii. The above manner in which the reasons were simply recorded for The above manner in which the reasons

ITO 1(2)(3), Mumbai vs. M Pallonji Enerprises P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas dismissed whereas cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1907/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-1(2)(3), M/S M Pallonji Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 527, 5Th Floor, Aayakar 46/A, Cawasji Patel Street, Fort, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aafcm 3357 A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 68

Officer reopened the assessment Nil. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment after recording reasons to bel after recording reasons to believe that income escaped assessment ieve that income escaped assessment and issued notice under section 148 issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 28/03/2014. In on 28/03/2014 ... whether the reasons recorded by the Assessing dispute before us is whether the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer to believe that income escaped assessment are merely based Officer to believe that income escaped assessment are merely based Officer to believe that income escaped assessment are merely based on change

R.Rajagopal Tondaiman, Trichy vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Trichy

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

ITA 525/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.525/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sri R. Rajagopal Tondaiman, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Old No. 4-D, New No. 22, Collector Income Tax, Office Road, Trichy 620 001. Central Circle 1, Trichy. [Pan:Afbpr0712E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Viswanathan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Trichy, Dated 30.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Is A Hereditary Of Raja Of Pudukottai & Stated That He Is Assessed To Tax In The Status Of Huf & Individual. The Property At Cenotaph Road, Chennai Was Given To M/S. Doshi Housing Ltd. On A Development Agreement Entered Into On 30.01.2006 Through A Power Of Attorney. The Assessing Officer Has 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Viswanathan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

section. To this limited extent, 12 I.T.A. No.525/Chny/20 the action of the Income-tax Officer in starting proceedings in respect of income escaping assessment is open to challenge in a court of law.” 6.6 Under the above facts and circumstances and various case law referred hereinabove, we set aside

Ayyappa Seva Samgham Bombay, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-53, Mumbai

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

ITA 699/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2022AY 2010-11
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

believing that income of the assessee has escaped assessment. The underlying reason for that is that instances of concealed income or other income escaping assessment in a large number of cases come to the notice of the income-tax authorities after the assessment has been completed. The provisions

Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), -4, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1149/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 263Section 92C

whole assessment proceeding became reopened, which was negatived by the Court opining : "Section 147, which is subject to section 148, divides cases of income escaping assessment into two clauses, viz., (a) those due to the non-submission of the return of income or non-disclosure of true and full facts

M/S. Gita Refractories Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 11(2), Bangalore

In the result, the second question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue and as a result thereof the appeal fails and dismissed as such

ITA 80/BANG/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Sept 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri V Narendra Sharma, Advocate by RevenueFor Respondent: Shri K Sankar Ganesh, JCIT (DR) by
Section 115JSection 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263Section 40A(3)

dated 26.08.2019 and from the assessment order also. 12. Now we are reproducing the relevant section which is as under:- Income escaping assessment. 76147. If the 77[Assessing] Officer 78[has reason to believe79] that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment79 for any assessment year, he may, subject

Sivakumaran Pugazhendhi, Chennai vs. PCIT, Chennai-4

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/CHNY/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.27/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sivakumaran Pugazhendhi, The Principal Commissioner 70 Raja Agraharam Street, Vs. Of Income Tax, Poonamalle, Chennai-4. Chennai – 600 056. [Pan: Aiapp-7309-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2022 : 21.09.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

whole assessment proceeding became reopened, which was negatived by the court opining: "Section 147, which is subject to Section 148, divides cases of income escaping assessment into two clauses i.e. viz. (a) those due to the non- submission of return of income or non-disclosure of true and full facts

Sureaksha DB Realty, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 30(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 482/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Suraksha Db Realty The Dy. Commissioner Of Behind Orchid Suburbia, Ground Income-Tax 30(3), Floor, Off; Link Road, Kandivali Room No.601, C-13, Vs. 6Th Floor, Bkc, (West), Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abofs0694R Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar Department By : Shri Op Sharma, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri OP Sharma, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69CSection 80

other income which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of proceedings u/s 147, apart from the income escaping assessment on which the AO formed reason to believe about the escapement of income and issued notice u/s 148. The use of words „and' between ... income escaping assessment forming reasons to believe for issuing notice u/s 148 and other income chargeable to tax which escaped assessment and comes to the notice of the AO in the course of the proceeding, amply shows that the existence of the former is a pre-condition for taxing