“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

The ACIT Cent. Cir -5(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Nitan Chhatwal, Mumbai

In the result, the both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2244/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

period of six months i.e., upto 31-1- 2014. However, assessing officer choose to reopen the assessment on the reason of income escaping assessment on 12-12-2013, when the assessment proceedings have not even been started. On the issue whether the proceedings under section 147 are correct when

ACIT Cent. Cir -5(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Nitan Chhatwal, Mumbai

In the result, the both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2243/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Sri C Gangadhara Murthy, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2400/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Shri C. Gangadhara Murthy Income-Tax, No. 322, 3Rd A Corss, 2Nd Block Circle - 6(2)(1) 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore . Bangalore 560079. Pan – Agipg 2668 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2

there could not be any escapement of income. Once assessment is not complete as return was pending, question of holding an income escaping assessment does not arise. According to ld. AR, the word 'assessment' in section 147/148 means computing assessable income and computing tax payable thereon. The ld. AR referred ... neither Explanation 2(a) nor Explanation 2(b) is applicable. Explanation 2(c) is also not applicable because section 147/148 relates to income escaping assessment and escaping assessment can only be considered once the power of making assessment under the statute is not available to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, till

DCIT 15(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Premier Supplies & Services P Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1384/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – 15(2)(2) V. M/S. Premier Supplies & Services Pvt. Ltd., Office No. 47, Satya Sai Plaza Room No. 357, 3Rd Floor Sector-11, Plot No. 5 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Panvel, Navi Mumbai - 410206 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaccg2655A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

arises for consideration. CIT vs. Smt. Vinita Jain [163 TAXMAN 325 (Del. HC)] Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Income escaping assessment General - Assessment year 1997-98 - Whether there must be reason to believe warranting issuance of a notice under section 148 by Assessing Officer, if there ... escaped assessment, reassessment was not justified. Harikishan Sunderlal Virmani vs. DCIT [88 taxmann.com 548 (Gujarat)] Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment General (Illustrations) - Assessment year 2009-10 - Reopening of assessment beyond four years on basis of information received from external source, viz., Principal Director

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Shri. Sumir J Hinduja, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1374/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aacph7291Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aaeph5197H Appellant Respondent C.O. No.48/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1373/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent C.O. No.49/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1374/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Susan Dolores George, D.R. Respondent By : Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri Susan Dolores George, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R

Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

assessment or re-computation. It is undisputed Legal position that the provisions of Sec. 147 is specifically meant to bring to tax 'income escaping assessment' in an assessment, reassessment or re computation. However, for availing and invoking the provisions of Sec. 147, the Assessing Officer should have 'reason to believe ... ACIT, Circle 11(4), Bengaluru. No formation of belief: 7.4 The reasons recorded do not cause any prudent person to believe that income escaped assessment to tax. The material available with the AO at the time of recording reasons was not sufficient enough to infer that any loan was advanced

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Shri. Jagadish N Hinduja, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1373/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Susan Dolores George, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R

Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

Shri.J M Vrushabendraiah, Hospet vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 299/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Narayana K.R., D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250

Therefore, the provisions of Section 153C were not applicable in the case of Assessee. Therefore, the AO, after perusal of the information about income escaping assessment, has rightly invoked the provisions of Section 147. 6.4 Without prejudice to the above, it may be pertinent to examine whether ... provisions of section 147, separate clauses (a) and (h) laid down the Shri J.M. Vrushabendraiah, Hospete Page 45 of 58 circumstances under which income escaping assessment for the past assessment years could he assessed or reassessed. To Confer jurisdiction under section 147(a) two conditions were required to be satisfied

Mehul Gems Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the different assessees are allowed in terms as indicated above

ITA 384/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 384/Mum/2022 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya &For Respondent: Shri Mahita Nair, Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 251(2)

sustained and the case of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain which fact has also been noted by AO, then there is no question of any income escaping assessment in the hands of the assessee. Very premise of reopening the case that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment is found

Ghanshyam Vashishta, Surat vs. ACIT CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different assessees are allowed in terms as indicated above

ITA 341/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am

Section 143(3)

Shree Ahuja Properties & Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC -6 (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7215/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Shree Ahuja Vs. Dcit – Cc – 6(2) Properties & Developers Room No. 1903, 19Th A/201, Rajpipla, Opp Floor, Air India Bldg, Standard Chartered Nariman Point, Bank, Santacruz(W), Mumbai – 400021. Mumbai – 400054. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abefs2387M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ms.Kavita Kaushik.Dr Date Of Hearing 07.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 13.06.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 54 Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms.Kavita Kaushik.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

made in reassessment order; d) the reasons recorded are vague and general in nature without giving any specific transaction/s or detail/s of any income escaping assessment; e) the reasons, even if held to be valid, are recorded upon borrowed satisfaction i.e. on the direction of the third party i.e. DDIT

Ibm India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 584/BANG/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jun 2022AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, CA

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 29Section 36(1)(vii)Section 50B

Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, "the Act"]. Prior to Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, Section 147 reads as under: "Income escaping assessment. 147. If-- [a] the Income-tax Officer has reason to believe that, by reason of the omission or failure on the part of an assessee ... enactment of Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, i.e., prior to 1st April, 1989, Section 147 of the Act, reads as under: "147. Income escaping assessment.-- If the Assessing Officer, for reasons to be recorded by him in writing, is Page 13 of 19 of the opinion that any income

M/S. Gokaldas Images Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Bangalore

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

ITA 2359/BANG/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kulkarni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R

Section 10BSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

which is as under:- ITA No.2359 & 2360/Bang/2019 Page 10 of 12 “Section 148, read with section 147, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice for (General) - Assessing Officer noticed that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and he initiated reassessment under section 147 - Assessee

Vilas Sadashiv Nalawade, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 336/MUM/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Section 139Section 147Section 54F

open to the assessee to seek review of items unconnected with the escapement of income for the purpose of computation of the income escaping assessment”, as was held in Sun Engineers Works (supra), the claim of exemption under section 54F is not hit by this proposition inasmuch

M/S. Biocon Limited, Bengaluru vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on the legal issue raised in ground no

ITA 1858/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2010-11 The Joint M/S. Biocon Ltd., Commissioner Of 20Th Km, Hosur Road, Income-Tax, Electronic City, Large Tax Payers Bangalore – 560 100. Unit [Ltu], Pan: Aaacb7461R Vs. Bangalore. Appellant Respondent : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Assessee By Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2018 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-3, Bangalore For A.Y. 2010-11 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein Below Are Independent & Without Prejudice To The Other Grounds Preferred By The Appellant. 1. That On Facts & Circumstances Of The ' Case & In Law, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals ["Cit(A)"] Dated March 28, 2018 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") For Ay 2010-11 To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant, Is Bad In Law & Facts & Liable To Be Quashed. 2. Scope Of Re-Assessment Proceedings

For Respondent: Shri Padam Chand Khincha

Section 147Section 250Section 35

Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, i.e., prior to 1-4-1989, section 147 of the Act, reads as under: Page 24 of 41 "147. Income escaping assessment.- If the Assessing Officer, for reasons to be recorded by him in writing, is of the opinion that any income chargeable ... sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year)." 3.2 After the Amending Act, 1989, section 147 reads as under: "147. Income escaping assessment.- If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject

Vijay Kumar, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5755/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assessee Had Filed A Condonation Petition Together With His Affidavit & Also An Affidavit From The Chartered Accountant Of The Assessee Narrating The Facts & Explaining The Reasons For Delay. We Have Gone Through Those Documents & We Are Convinced That Assessee Was Prevented From Reasonable Cause In Not Filing The Appeal Before Us Within The Prescribed Time. Hence, We Deem It Fit & Appropriate To Condone The Delay In Filing Of Appeal By The Assessee & Admit The Appeal For Adjudication.

Section 143(3)

basis of an item of income or disallowance, which has already been made in block assessment of the assessee, thereby leaving no income escaping assessment. Under these circumstances we are satisfied that having made addition of Rs. 527.85 lakhs in the block assessment, the Assessing Officer was not justified

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(2), Bangalore vs. Mr. M R Seetharam, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 256/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2007-08

For Respondent: Shri Naginchand Khincha

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153Section 153A

Counsel for the Revenue submitted that, the information emanated from search and, based on such information, the Ld.AO had reason to believe that, income escaped assessment, for the year under consideration. He submitted that, from the seized material marked A/M/08, it was noted that, amount of Rs.14 ... books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person.] " [underline is ours] "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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Chaitanya Properties Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

ITA 618/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Dr. Manjunath Karkihally, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, Advocate

Section 153ASection 153C

dealt with by the concerned AO, the department proceeded to estimate income based on the covenants contained in the JDA and assessed income escaping assessment which order came to be confirmed by the CIT(Appeals). However, the assessee succeeded in its appeal before the ITAT which quashed the assessment vide

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Chaitanya Properties Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

ITA 617/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Dr. Manjunath Karkihally, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, Advocate

Section 153ASection 153C

ACIT 4 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kotak Securities Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 7357/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2022AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh IraniFor Respondent: Smt. Neelam Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 73

assessment proceedings have been initiated on account of mere change in opinion in absence of any fresh tangible material having live link with income escaping assessment. Accordingly, we hold that the re-assessment proceedings are invalid having been initiated in violation of the provisions of Section 147 read with Section

Hsbc Asset Management (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.1 raised by assessee is allowed and assessment order framed found to be without jurisdiction

ITA 7292/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalhsbc Asset Management (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Mercantile Bank Chamber, 16 Veer Nariman, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aabch0007N ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-1(1)(2) Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Niraj Sheth, Ar Respondent By : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit (A)’] Vide Order Dated 13.10.2017 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Distinct & Separate & Without Prejudice To Each Other. 1. On The Facts & In Law, The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - 6, Mumbai [‘Cit(A)’] Erred In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Initiated After Four Years From The End Of Relevant Assessment Year, Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Made & The Appellant Had Disclosed Fully & Truly All Material Facts Necessary

For Appellant: Sh. Niraj Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 37(1)Section 40A(9)

equally important that Respondent clearly sets out what fact or other material was not disclosed by the Petitioner that had led to the income escaping assessment as contemplated u/s 147. No failure on the part of the Petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts as contemplated under ... should have been treated as Capital expenditure. Since it was treated as revenue expenditure, there was Computation of excessive loss which resulted in income escaping assessment. Therefore now, despite the fact that in the original assessment order this very expenditure was allowed as revenue expenditure, Respondent No.1 now seeks