← All Phrases

“material facts necessary for assessment”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 147564 judgments

The decision most relied on for material facts necessary for assessment is Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO (41 ITR 191), cited in 384 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on material facts necessary for assessment

Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO
41 ITR 191 · 1961 · Supreme Court
384
citing judgments

The assessee's duty is limited to disclosing all primary, material facts necessary for assessment, including entries, documents, and other evidence. It is for the Assessing Officer to draw inferences of fact and law, and the assessee is not obligated to offer such inferences.

CIT v. Foramer France
264 ITR 566 · 2003 · Supreme Court
253
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year are invalid unless the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Without such failure, the notice issued under Section 148 is time-barred and without jurisdiction.

153 (Gujarat) 8 Shakti Karnawat v. ITO
296 ITR 90 · 2008 · High Court
171
citing judgments

A live link of third-party information can form the basis for reopening an assessment under Section 148, provided it contains material facts necessary for assessment. The Assessing Officer must demonstrate a "reason to believe" that income has escaped assessment, which can be satisfied by such information even if it pertains to other assessees or relates to accommodation entries.

Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
250 CTR 119 · 2012 · High Court
51
citing judgments

An assessment cannot be reopened beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the assessee failed to make a full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment.

ACIT v. CEAT Ltd.
449 ITR 171 · 2022 · Supreme Court
44
citing judgments

Reopening of an assessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year is invalid if it is based on a mere change of opinion or borrowed satisfaction, or if the reasons recorded do not explicitly allege the assessee's failure to truly and fully disclose all material facts necessary for assessment.

CIT v. Foramer Finance
251 ITR 416 · 2001 · High Court
41
citing judgments

Reopening assessments is permissible after four years if there was an escapement of income due to the assessee's failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment, even if the initial assessment involved a change of opinion.

Dalmia P. Ltd. v. CIT
348 ITR 469 · 2012 · High Court
41
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings are valid when there is a failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.

R 603 Mad. (14) Well Intertrade P. Ltd vs. CIT, 308 ITR 22 (Del) (15) Sitara Diamond P. Ltd. v. DCIT
343 ITR 183 · 2012 · High Court
40
citing judgments

Reopening assessment beyond four years under Section 147 is permissible only if the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly the material facts necessary for assessment. Mere change of opinion is not a valid ground for reopening.

Judgments citing material facts necessary for assessment

Lovely Promoters Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

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

ITA 770/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a
Section 127Section 127(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153C

material on record and by the reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, there is enough reason to believe that income has escaped assessment in the hand of assessee. Therefore, I have reason to believe that

Nova Estates Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 18(4), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 76/DEL/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: The Ld. Ao & Despite Such Scrutiny No Addition Was Made In The Original Assessment Proceedings.

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

holding that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment due to the failure of the assessee to disclose fully and trully all material facts necessary for assessment. 3. That the Ld. AO did not have any 'reason to believe' as contemplated under Section 147 of the Act for re-opening

ITO, Ward-20(1), New Delhi vs. Placid Buildwell P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6744/DEL/2018[ 2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2024

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Nath Baranwal, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

that the income has escaped assessment on account of failure on part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention

Karamshi Jethabhai Somaiya Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer(Exemption), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2608/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri. K. Gopal a/w Ms. NehaFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule , Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

above proviso the reassessment can be initiated only when failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. The Ld. AR submitted that the impugned issue for which the reopening was done by the assessing officer was already verified

Narmada Concast Private Limited, Bhavnagar vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 33/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 148

recorded, there was no allegation that there was any failure on the part of the assessee in not disclosing truly and fully material facts necessary for assessment. Under the circumstances, the assumption of the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment beyond the period of four years in exercise of powers under

Fatehpuria Transformers and Witchgears Pvt. Ltd, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

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

ITA 387/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar MathurFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 801ASection 801A(5)Section 80I

time of completing the original assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 21.02.2014, it had fully and truly disclosed all the material facts necessary for assessment. I have carefully considered the contention of the assessee and examined the same in the light of the factual matrix of the case ... section 147 of the Act is attracted. Coming to the issue of whether the assessee had fully and truly disclosed all the material facts necessary for assessment at the time of filing the return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act or during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings u/s.143

Larsen & Tourbro Infotech Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 585/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2007-08
Section 10Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

ought to have appreciated that neither any income has escaped assessment nor the appellant has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment u/s. 143(3). Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Larsen & Toubro Infotech Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2641/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2006-07
Section 10Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

ought to have appreciated that neither any income has escaped assessment nor the appellant has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment u/s. 143(3). Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

ACIT, Ernakulam vs. Appolo Tyres Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals as well as the Assessee’s COs, are allowed

ITA 140/COCH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit K. Das, CIT-DR and Smt
Section 147

reassessment proceedings, found as not maintainable by the ld.CIT(A) as there was a true and full disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment by the assessee, precluding reassessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year/s, in view whereof the other grounds do not arise ... income escaping assessment being so due to failure, inter alia, on the part of the assessee to disclose – fully and truly – all material facts necessary for assessment of his income for the relevant year. Per contra, a true and full disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment

ACIT, Ernakulam vs. Appolo Tyres Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals as well as the Assessee’s COs, are allowed

ITA 139/COCH/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit K. Das, CIT-DR and Smt
Section 147

reassessment proceedings, found as not maintainable by the ld.CIT(A) as there was a true and full disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment by the assessee, precluding reassessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year/s, in view whereof the other grounds do not arise ... income escaping assessment being so due to failure, inter alia, on the part of the assessee to disclose – fully and truly – all material facts necessary for assessment of his income for the relevant year. Per contra, a true and full disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment

Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT -Ltu -1, Mumbai

In the result we find that in absence of tangible material, the reopening of assessment cannot be made

ITA 3949/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Dy. Commissioner Of Bajaj Auto Limited 2N D Floor, Bajaj Bhawan, Income-Tax, Vs. 226, Nariman Point, Large Taxpayer Unit-1 Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcb2923M

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 147

submission in respect of the reasons recorded and whether there has been failure on its part to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment are being analyzed here in under: Bajaj Auto Ltd; A.Y. 2010-11 6.3.1 In respect of the amount of Rs.76.08 crores on account ... this case was completed u/s 143(3) and further there being no failure on their part to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, the reopening done by the AO was bad in law. To support such contention, the appellant contends that they had submitted copy

M/S. Arshiya Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT - CC-6(4), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 575/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

Section 133ASection 139Section 142Section 143Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 68

response to a notice issued under section 142 (1) or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment for that assessment year. 11. The learned CIT DR vehemently submitted that assessee has not raised this ground of appeal before the learned ... reason itself shows that there is a failure on part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment for that assessment year. Assessee did not disclose that it has transacted with the accommodation entry provider and therefore there is a failure on part

Shri Ravjibhai B Dhameliya, Surat vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 124/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

petitioner, there is no whisper, what to speak of any allegation, that the petitioner had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and that because of this failure there has been an escapement of income chargeable to tax. The assessing officer (AO) was not having

ACIT, Circle-3(3), Surat vs. Shri Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhameliya, Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 122/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

petitioner, there is no whisper, what to speak of any allegation, that the petitioner had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and that because of this failure there has been an escapement of income chargeable to tax. The assessing officer (AO) was not having

DCIT, Circle-3(3), Surat vs. Shri Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhameliya, Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 304/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

petitioner, there is no whisper, what to speak of any allegation, that the petitioner had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and that because of this failure there has been an escapement of income chargeable to tax. The assessing officer (AO) was not having

Shri Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhameliya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1(1), Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 239/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

petitioner, there is no whisper, what to speak of any allegation, that the petitioner had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and that because of this failure there has been an escapement of income chargeable to tax. The assessing officer (AO) was not having

M/S. Sabari Developers, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

ITA 5388/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Satish Kumar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Ajay Singh, D.R
Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 151

assessee had received on money in cash for sale of various properties and as such the assessee has failed to disclose all material facts necessary for assessment, notice under section 148 of 4 M/s. Sabari Developers LLP the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. Necessary notices under section

Sumit Goel, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

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

ITA 8/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar(Adv.)&For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Addl.CIT)
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 56Section 68Section 69C

Asain Bulls Pvt Ltd M/s Asain Bulls Pvt Ltd Rs. 22,84,800/- The assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. The assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. The assessee failed to disclose fully and truly ... material facts necessary for assessment. By such accommodation entry assessee has introduced unaccounted income in his books By such accommodation entry assessee has introduced unaccounted income in his books By such accommodation entry assessee has introduced unaccounted income in his books of accounts without paying tax.” of accounts without paying

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-1), Raipur vs. M/S Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd., Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 73/RPR/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.73/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. H. No.11, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aahcs7999A ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri, Sakshi Gopal Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(2)(b)

Circle-1), Raipur Vs. M/s. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. there was a failure on your part to disclose fully and truly all material fact necessary for assessment for the AY 2007-08." From the above discussion, it is evident that impugned material was submitted during the original assessment proceedings ... crucial expressions appearing in section 147 of the Act are "reason to believe" and "failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment". These two expressions were examined and interpreted in great detail by Hon'ble Supreme Court in ITO vs. Lalchmani Mewal

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur vs. M/S Jagannathdas Harichandmal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Raigarh

In the result appeal of revenue is partly allowed in terms of our observations herein above

ITA 106/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.106/Rpr/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Jagannathdas Harichandmal Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Sadar Bazar, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan: Aaccj2840G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal, Dated 16.03.2022 Which In Turn Arises From The Order By Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Dated 30.12.2018 For A.Y.2012-13. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: “ 1. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, While Holding Assessment Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of Act As Invalid & Void-Ab-Initio, The Ld. Cit(A) Completely Ignored The Fact That During The Course Of Survey, The Assessee Failed To Discharge Its Burden In Establishing 'The Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transactions As Required U/S 68 Of The Income Tac Act. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Reassessment Proceeding Are Based On Fresh Facts/Information Rather Than Change Of Opinion. 2. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Confirmation Of Concealment Of Income/Disclosure Made In Statement Recorded During Survey U/S 133A Of Act Is An Information, Though Not Conclusive, Which May Be Used In Regular Assessment Or Reassessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

crucial expressions appearing in section 147 of the Act are "reason to believe" and "failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment". These two expressions were examined and interpreted in great detail by Hon'ble Supreme Court in ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal ... assessment year 2012-13 by the reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. On perusal of the order of Ld CIT(A), it is clearly transpired that the issue pertaining to receipt of share capital