“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

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

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

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

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

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

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata vs. Murlidhar Ratanlal Exports Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2187/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsyan &For Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, DR

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

2196/KOL/2024 Murlidhar Ratanlal Exports Limited; AYs: 2013-14 to 2016-17, 2018-19 any information fully and truly disclosing all material facts necessary for assessment or failure on the part of the assessment to make the return u/s 139(1) of the Act or in response to notice ... reasons to believe that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any information fully and truly disclosing all material facts necessary for assessment. Considering the facts of the case in the light of the aforesaid decision, we are inclined to quash the reopening of assessment

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata vs. Murlidhar Ratanlal Exports Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the COs of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2179/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsyan &For Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, DR

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata vs. Murlidhar Ratanlal Exports Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the

ITA 2178/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsyan &For Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, DR

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Anshuman Auto Impex Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4152/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Anshuman Auto Impex Pvt. Ltd., Ward-2(1), 2126/59, Laxmi Bhawan, New Delhi Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0872H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr

Section 147Section 148

such information from Investigation wing for coming to prima facie conclusion that assessee had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment Thus, is could not be said that reopening proceedings were initiated on basis of incorrect facts or borrowed satisfaction from Investigation Wing. Therefore, Impugned

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1565/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya andFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1555/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Respondent: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya and

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

Shresth Dealers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CC 4(1), Kolkata

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 427/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Balance sheet, Tax Audit Report along with ROI where various information/material were disclosed. However, the requisite full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment has not been made as noted above. For aforesaid reasons, it is not a case of change of opinion

Shalibhadra Exprorts Pvt Ltd, Mumabi vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1287/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm& Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan KR. Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Saurabh Kumar Rai, CIT DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

further noticed that, having mentioned the above fact the AO has recorded that the requisite full and to disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment has 6 I.T.A. No. 1287/Mum/2022) Shalibhadra Exports Pvt. Ltd. not been made by the assessee. The relevant part of the reason recorded in this ... balance sheet along with the return of income where various information/material were disclosed. However, the requisite full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment has not been made. It is pertinent to mention here that even though the assessee has produced various evidences during the course

Jain Textile Industries, Gurgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed as devoid of

ITA 932/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Jain Textile Industries, V Assistant Commissioner Of 38, Milestone, Behrampur S Income Tax, Circle-1(1) Road, Village Khandsa, Hsiiddc Building, 4Th Floor, Gurgaon, Haryana Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon Pan: Aabfj8405F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Bhupender Jit Kumar, Adv, Sh. Nikhil Sharma, Adv & Sh. Tushar Kalra, Adv Revenue By Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 251(1)(a)

documents along with return of income where various information/ material were disclosed. However, the requisite full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment has not been made as noted above. It is pertinent to mention here that even though the assessee has produced information / documents or other

DCIT, Central Circle-14, Delhi vs. Parveen Aggarwal, Gurgaon

Accordingly the same are hereby upheld. Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 197/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Parveen Aggarwal, Vs Acit, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden Central Circle-14, Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon New Delhi Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs Parveen Aggarwal, Central Circle-14, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden New Delhi Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri K.Sampath, Adv. & Shri V.Rajkumar, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.10.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Cross-Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)- 27, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.11.2022 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-27/10482/2019-20 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dt. 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13. Ita Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

balance sheet along with return of income where various information/material were disclosed. However, the requisite full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment has not been made as noted above. If is pertinent to mention here that even though the assessee has produced books of accounts annual

Parveen Aggarwal, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi

Accordingly the same are hereby upheld. Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 178/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

DCIT Central Circle-06, New Delhi vs. Praveen Kumar Jolly, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in No

ITA 1654/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Praveen Kumar Jolly, Central Circle-06, 39/1, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi-110008. Pan-Aagpj0144C Appellant Respondent

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

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. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention

Pankaj Kumar Gupta, Azamgarh vs. ITO Ward3(1), Income Tax Office Azamgarh

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 126/VNS/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi10 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: S/Shri Piyush Kumar Kamal and Abhishek Kumar Gupta, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Smt Amandeep Kaur, D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(c)

furnished return of income even otherwise there was no failure on the part of assesse to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment and as such action u/s 147 was in excess of jurisdiction; 1:3 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed

Pankaj Kumar Gupta, Azamgarh vs. Income Tax Officer

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 125/VNS/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi10 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: S/Shri Piyush Kumar Kamal and Abhishek Kumar Gupta, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Smt Amandeep Kaur, D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(c)

Income Tax Officer Ward-22(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Gopal Ramchand Kanjani, Mumbaifh

ITA 733/MUM/2025[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramaniam, AR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

mere disclosure of the impugned transactions in the return of income cannot be considered as disclosure of true and full disclosure of material facts necessary for assessment since processing of return under section 143(1) considers only the arithmetical errors and incorrect claims which are apparent. Be that ... processing under section 143(1) as it existed in the relevant AY cannot be considered as disclosure of fully or truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Accordingly we dismiss the C.O. of the assessee. 9. In result, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee

Brand India Real Estate Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

believe that income had escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. In absence of this pre-condition, the reopening is mere change of opinion. 1. The assessment proceeding of the assessee for the year ... detail & documents in respect of share application. Therefore, the observation of ld. AO that “the requisite full and true disclosure of all materials facts necessary for assessment has not been made as noted above” is completely perverse. Something which could be discovered by due diligence

Nasa Agro Industries Private Limited, Fazilka vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-II, Bathinda

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

ITA 236/ASR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Y. K. Sud & Sh. P. K. Anand, CAs

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153cSection 250

FROM INVESTIGATION WING SHOWING THAT ASSESSEE HAD TRADED IN SHARES WITH BENEFICIARY OF SEARCHED BOGUS COMPANY- ASSESSEE DISCLOSED FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ASSESSMENT- REASONS CANNOT BE SUPPLEMENTED BY AFFIDAVIT-NOTICE UNSUSTAINABLE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, 55. 147, 148. 12. 434 ITR 621 (Guj) Bharatkumar Nihalchand Shah

S K N Sikshan Sansthan, Bhadhadhar vs. Dy. Commissioner Income Tax (Central)-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 445/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumarskn Shikshan Sansthan, 1, N. H. 11 Bhadhadar Sikar 332 315 Pan No.: Aamts 1103L ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Shafi Mohammad, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 57

took the specific plea that in the absence of any allegation that the petitioner had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to issue the notice under section 148 and initiate action under section 147 after four years from

Avon Containners Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 5161/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

Assessing officer has made the assessment without recording any failure on part of the appellant company to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment as per the first proviso to section 147 of the Act. Rather Ld. 2 Avon Containners P. Ltd. A.O has wrongly/mistakenly reopened

Yashodhan Shanti Realtors, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 2(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4159/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250Section 68

income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment on account of the failure of the assessee to disclose full and trüe material facts necessary for assessment of its income for the assessment year under consideration. 5. As per the provisions of section 151(1) of the Income