← All Phrases

“beyond four years”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 147536 judgments

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR vs. GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 1254/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 14A

part of the assessee in disclosing the disallowance made by the assessee u/s.14A of the Act. Further the assessments are reopened beyond four years period in both the asst. years, therefore the reopening of assessment itself is invalid in law, since there is no failure on the part

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR vs. GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 1249/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 14A

part of the assessee in disclosing the disallowance made by the assessee u/s.14A of the Act. Further the assessments are reopened beyond four years period in both the asst. years, therefore the reopening of assessment itself is invalid in law, since there is no failure on the part

GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 1166/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 14A

part of the assessee in disclosing the disallowance made by the assessee u/s.14A of the Act. Further the assessments are reopened beyond four years period in both the asst. years, therefore the reopening of assessment itself is invalid in law, since there is no failure on the part

GUJARAT STATE PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 1165/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 14A

part of the assessee in disclosing the disallowance made by the assessee u/s.14A of the Act. Further the assessments are reopened beyond four years period in both the asst. years, therefore the reopening of assessment itself is invalid in law, since there is no failure on the part

CHHABI LATA SAHU,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, ROURKELA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 626/CTK/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Mar 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Chhabi Lata Sahu Ito, Ward-4, Rourkela

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Sarangi & Bishwa Jyoti Pattnaik, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 148

change of opinion. Such reopening is impermissible when an original assessment has been done u/s 143(3) and the reopening is done beyond four years from the end of the impugned assessment year. Under the circumstances and respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa

GRANULES INDIA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1289/HYD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं / Ita No.1289/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) Granules India Limited Vs. Dcit- Circle -2(1) 15Th Floor, Granules Tower Signature Tower, Botanical Garden Road Sy. No. 6(P) Of Kondaput Kondapur, Hyderabad – 500084 Sy. No. 37 Of Kothaguda Telangana Opp. Botanical Gardens Serilingampalluy, R.R. District Pan: Aaacg7369K Hyderabad-500084, Telangana (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment on the ground that the assessment has been reopened beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year without any allegation as to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully ... present case was completed under section 143(3) of the Act and the assessment has been reopened under section 147 of the Act beyond four years from end of the relevant assessment year. Once the assessment has been reopened beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year

SHIV EXTRUSION,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 646/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shiv Extrusion Vs. Income Tax Officer Plot No.3978 Phase Iiiroad Income Tax Office, Ito Ward No.-R Dared, Jamnagar 2(10), Jamnagar, Income 361004, Gujarat, India, Jamnagar Tax Office, Shiv Smruti, Jamnagar, Jamnagar, Gujarat, 361008, Jamnagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abkfs7199F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 151ASection 250

Invalidity due to Improper Sanction for Original Notice (Section 151 Old Regime): The original notice under Section 148 dated 17.06.2021, issued beyond four years from the end of AY 2016-17 (expired 31.03.2020), was invalid as the approval was obtained only from the JCIT, Range-1, Jamnagar. For cases initiated ... beyond four years under the old regime, Section 151(1) mandated approval from the Principal/Chief Commissioner. Approval from the lower authority (ICIT) constitutes an incurable defect that vitiates the entire proceedings. 4. Invalidity due to Improper Sanction for Subsequent Notice (Section 151 New Regime): The subsequent notice u/s 148 dated

KASHI NATH SETH SARRAF PRIVATE LIMITED,HARDOI vs. DCIT, SITAPUR, SITAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 86/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Mar 2026AY 2012-13
For Respondent: \nShri Akshay Agrawal, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

dismissed the assessee's appeal.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was invalid as it was beyond four years and there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts. The addition was based on a change of opinion without

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, YAMUNANAGAR vs. M/S THE VED PARKASH MUKAND LAL, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

ITA 833/CHANDI/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

from para 4.1 onwards of the impugned order. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee objected that the case was reopened beyond four years. However, Ld. AO had accepted the claim of the assessee during regular assessment proceedings after due consideration of material on record, facts of the case, explanations offered ... accepting the returned income. However, the case was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act on 27-03-2012 which is beyond four years from end of relevant AY 2005-06. The reopening stem from the opinion of Ld. AO that the approx. 80% of receipts were applied towards

DCIT vs. M/S THE VED PARKASH MUKAND LAL, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

ITA 832/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

from para 4.1 onwards of the impugned order. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee objected that the case was reopened beyond four years. However, Ld. AO had accepted the claim of the assessee during regular assessment proceedings after due consideration of material on record, facts of the case, explanations offered ... accepting the returned income. However, the case was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act on 27-03-2012 which is beyond four years from end of relevant AY 2005-06. The reopening stem from the opinion of Ld. AO that the approx. 80% of receipts were applied towards

THE VED PRAKASH MUKAND LAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,YAMUNANAGAR vs. DCIT, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

ITA 825/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

from para 4.1 onwards of the impugned order. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee objected that the case was reopened beyond four years. However, Ld. AO had accepted the claim of the assessee during regular assessment proceedings after due consideration of material on record, facts of the case, explanations offered ... accepting the returned income. However, the case was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act on 27-03-2012 which is beyond four years from end of relevant AY 2005-06. The reopening stem from the opinion of Ld. AO that the approx. 80% of receipts were applied towards

THE VED PRAKASH MUKAND LAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,YAMUNANAGAR vs. DCIT, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

ITA 824/CHANDI/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Yamini (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

from para 4.1 onwards of the impugned order. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee objected that the case was reopened beyond four years. However, Ld. AO had accepted the claim of the assessee during regular assessment proceedings after due consideration of material on record, facts of the case, explanations offered ... accepting the returned income. However, the case was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act on 27-03-2012 which is beyond four years from end of relevant AY 2005-06. The reopening stem from the opinion of Ld. AO that the approx. 80% of receipts were applied towards

LATE ABDULLAH ABDULMAJEED, REP. BY L/H,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, PUDUKKOTTAI

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

ITA 3294/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2015-16
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण 'बी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई।\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n'B' BENCH: CHENNΑΙ\nसुश्री पद्मावती

RANE STEERING SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, LTU,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2790/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy.S & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2790/Chny/2025 िनधा#रण वष# /Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr. Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

disallowances made by the A.O. 3. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee's case reopening was made beyond four years and therefore the proviso to Section 147 of the Act is applicable. The Ld. AR in this regard drew our attention to the reasons ... that assessment year: ***** 6. It is a settled legal position that in case reopening cannot be made where the assessment is reopened beyond four years in cases where the original assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act unless the assessee has failed to disclose information during the course

ROHITKUMAR CHINUBHAI MODI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIR. 5(2) NOW DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1961/AHD/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Satish Solanki, ARFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. It was further contended that the reopening was initiated beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year and, therefore, the proviso to section 147 squarely applied. The learned counsel submitted that the Department was already

SAURABHBHAI ROHITBHAI MODI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIR. 5(2) NOW DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1960/AHD/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Satish Solanki, ARFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. It was further contended that the reopening was initiated beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year and, therefore, the proviso to section 147 squarely applied. The learned counsel submitted that the Department was already

TRIMURTI STEELS,BHUBANESWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 625/CTK/2025[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack19 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiatrimurti Steels, I.T.O., Plot No. N-3885, Golap Niwas, Ward- 2(1) Vs. Samantarapur, Bhubaneshwar-751002 Bhubaneshwar. Odisha. Pan No. Aahft 1240 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 184Section 40

required for assessment. The First proviso to Section 147 clearly shows that for the purpose of reopening, if the reopening is done beyond four years and an assessment has already been done in the case of the assessee then there should be failure on the part of the assessee

RAMESH PURSHOTTAM MODI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE 22(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6577/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarramesh Purshottam Ito Circle 22(1) Modi Income Tax 303, Modi House, Linking Vs. Department, Road, Khar West, Piramal Chamber, Mumbai-400 052 Dr. Ss Rao Marg, Parel, Mumbai 0 400 012 Pan/Gir No. Aahpm2793F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashwani Kumar A/W Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 94(7)Section 94(8)

Assessing Officer cannot reopen on a ground which was examined in original assessment. 34. In the present case, the reopening has been made beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Therefore, the first proviso to section 147 is attracted. In such circumstances, reopening is permissible only ... such. 44. In view of the foregoing discussion, the reopening under section 147 is invalid as it is based on change of opinion, beyond four years without failure of disclosure, and addition made is not on the ground recorded. The proceedings under section 148A suffer from violation of statutory mandate

SPICE OF LIFE HOTELS AND ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7704/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beeba Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya Joshi &For Respondent: Assessee by
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

legal issues first, raised by the assessee with multifold propositions under reliance to host of judgments, detailed as under: “Proposition1-1 : For reassessment beyond four years, in the absence of new tangible material, reassessment is bad-in-law CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) Idea ... DCIT [2008] 301 ITR 407 (Bombay HC) CIT vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. [2013] 31 taxmann.com 53 (Bombay HC) Proposition 2: For reassessment beyond four years, in the absence of stating "exaet" failure on the part of the Appellant to disclose truly and fully all material facts relevant for assessment, reassessment

SPICE OF LIFE HOTELS AND ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7703/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beeba Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya Joshi &For Respondent: Assessee by
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

legal issues first, raised by the assessee with multifold propositions under reliance to host of judgments, detailed as under: “Proposition1-1 : For reassessment beyond four years, in the absence of new tangible material, reassessment is bad-in-law CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) Idea ... DCIT [2008] 301 ITR 407 (Bombay HC) CIT vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. [2013] 31 taxmann.com 53 (Bombay HC) Proposition 2: For reassessment beyond four years, in the absence of stating "exaet" failure on the part of the Appellant to disclose truly and fully all material facts relevant for assessment, reassessment

Showing 1–20 of 536 · Page 1 of 27

...