“borrowed satisfaction”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 1471,326 judgments

The decision most relied on for borrowed satisfaction is PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (395 ITR 677), cited in 471 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on borrowed satisfaction

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.

394 ITR 146 (Guj.) 2. Varshaben S. Patel v. ITO

338 ITR 51 · 2011 · High Court

295

citing judgments

Reasons for reopening an assessment must be specific and not vague, scanty, or based on borrowed satisfaction. The Assessing Officer must quantify the escaped income.

222 Taxman 15 (Gujarat)(MAG.), Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-4 v. G & G Pharma India Ltd.

384 ITR 147 · 2016 · High Court

274

citing judgments

An assessment can be reopened if there is tangible material indicating escapement of income, demonstrating a live link between the material and the reasons recorded for reopening. The Assessing Officer must apply their mind to the material facts, and the sanction under section 151 should not be based on borrowed satisfaction.

CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd.

325 ITR 285 · 2010 · High Court

243

citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid and void ab initio if initiated based on 'borrowed satisfaction' without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind, or merely on documents already available on record without fresh tangible material.

Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

329 ITR 110 · 2010 · High Court

217

citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid if the Assessing Officer records satisfaction based on borrowed satisfaction or information without independently applying their mind and forming their own 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment. The AO must arrive at an independent conclusion, not merely act on a report from an investigation wing without due diligence.

ITO v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. (P.) Ltd.

217 ITR 597 · 1996 · Supreme Court

180

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer's belief that income has escaped assessment, leading to the reopening of an assessment, is a matter of subjective satisfaction. The materials available at the time of forming this belief do not need to conclusively prove the escapement of income.

CIT v. SPL’s Siddhartha Ltd.

345 ITR 223 · 2012 · High Court

164

citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid if the sanction required under Section 151 is obtained mechanically, without independent application of mind by the sanctioning authority, or is based on borrowed satisfaction.

CIT v. Atul Jain

299 ITR 383 · 2008 · High Court

147

citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under section 147 are not valid if the information relied upon by the Assessing Officer is vague, scanty, and lacks specific details linking it to the assessee's transactions.

Judgments citing borrowed satisfaction

Omkar Singh, Noida vs. ITO Ward - 5(2)(1), Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3574/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

Considering the above facts and circumstances as the AO has recorded wrong reason for reopening, the case of the assessee was based on borrowed satisfaction and in absence of any independent verificationmade by the A.O., by following the ratio laiddown by the Hon’ble High Courts and the Tribunal (supra

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (in Situ) Circle-I, Ludhiana vs. Kapil Thapar, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and Cross

ITA 246/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 153CSection 69A

wrong reasons to believe' have been formed by the Assessing Officer, while reopening the case u/s 148 and it is a case of only borrowed satisfaction and the main stress of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee have been that in the notice in clause (d) of section 148A

Navnirman Infracon Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 689/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mehta, Addl. Sr. DR

Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(via)Section 56(2)(viia)

vague scanty and ambiguous and does not show any live link with the alleged escapement of income and that the reasons to belief were borrowed satisfaction of the other officers of the Income Tax Department. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. National Faceless Appeal ... there is no independent application of mind by the Id. AO to the information received and therefore, this is at best a case of borrowed satisfaction by the Id. Assessing Officer. Considering these facts and circumstances and in the light of aforesaid decisions, the reopening

Excellence Finance Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are

ITA 208/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi, (Sr. DR)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

illiquid stock options resulting in non-genuine business loss/gain to assessee was liable to be quashed since such reopening notice was issued on borrowed satisfaction as no independent opinion was formed and amount of said non-genuine profit was already offered to tax in return of income during regular scrutiny ... reopening was done on the basis of information received from DGIT (Inv.), Mumbai, it doesn't mean that the reopening was done on borrowed satisfaction. The AO had duly applied his mind and verified the information as received. He has given a specific finding that the loss

Excellence Finance Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are

ITA 207/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi, (Sr. DR)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Excellence Finance Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals of the assessee are

ITA 206/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Snehal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi, (Sr. DR)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

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

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 reopening notice issued against assessee is justified 3 | P a g e (vii) Hon'ble Gujarat High Court

Ashish Khemka HUF, Lucknow vs. DCIT / ACIT-1, Lucknow New, Lucknow

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

ITA 483/LKW/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2013-14 Ashish Khemka Huf V. Dcit/Acit-1 702, Shalimar Titanium Lucknow - New Vibhuti Khand Gomti Nagar, Lucknow (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aaeha6967L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R

Section 115BSection 132ASection 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

section 147 read with section 144 is unsustainable in law, void ab-initio and liable to be quashed. 4. Reasons have been recorded on borrowed satisfaction without conducting prior independent enquiry, therefore impugned assessment order under section 147 rws 144 of the income tax act 1961 is unsustainable

Pooja Kansal, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, G.Garh, Gobindgarh

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 225/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 224 & 225/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Pooja Kansal, The Ito, बनाम Kansla Singla & Ward -1, Associates, Gobindgarh Vs. Sco 80-81, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Abypk5904G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. T.N. Singla, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Kashyap, Cit Dr (Virtual Mode) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Both The Appeals Pertaining To A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017- 18 Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate

For Appellant: Sh. T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Kashyap, CIT DR

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 65A

made without any enquiry by the assessing officer and the said addition in the hands of appellant is made on the borrowed satisfaction. Further, the alleged bogus purchases are recorded in the regular books maintained by 8 224 & 225-Chd-2025 – Pooja Kansal, Chandigarh the company and the expenditure

Pooja Kansal, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, G.Garh, Gobindgarh

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 224/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Kashyap, CIT DR

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 65A

Prasada Rao Ganipineni, Nellore vs. ACIT., Circle - 1, Nellore

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

ITA 640/HYD/2025[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad27 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha Gआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.640/Hyd./2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2010-2011 Mr. Prasada Rao Ganipineni, Nellore. The Acit, Circle-1, Pin – 524 004. Vs. Nellore. Pan Acvpg9050D Andhra Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca, A. Srinivas राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.12.2024 Of The Learned Cit(A), Hyderabad- 11, Hyderabad, For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2

For Appellant: CA, A. SrinivasFor Respondent: : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

additions made on account of cash deposits amounting to Rs.2,01,00,000/- 6. The reopening of the Assessment by the A.O, is on borrowed satisfaction and as such should be quashed. 7. Any other grounds which the Assessee may urge either before or at the time of the hearing

Goodone Traders Private Limited, Delhi vs. CIT(A), Delhi

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

ITA 5591/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Goodone Traders Private Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Limited, 886A/47 (Appeals), Ward No. 6, Mehrauli Delhi Delhi- 1100 30 Pan: Aaacy2998Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Meenal Goyal, CA, Ms. VidhiFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT (DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

untenably re-opened concluded assessment proceedings solely based upon a complaint lodged by the Directorate of Enforcement vide borrowed satisfaction sans any independent verification and in a clear exercise of change of opinion merely to take a divergent view sans cogent material thereby contradicting the provisions of Section

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)

section 147 of the Act, because there is no independent formation of belief by the AO and the reopening has been made merely on borrowed satisfaction. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the validity ... fresh tangible material to support reasons for reassessment and the A.O. has not applied his mind and reasons have been recorded based on the borrowed satisfaction which is nothing but merely change of opinion of the A.O. 7. Per contra, the ld. Department's Representative submitted that the issue taken

Sri Prem Properties Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-24(1), New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 957/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sri Prem Properties Private Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 24 (1), A – 99, Bajghera Chowk, Delhi. New Palam Vihar, Gurgaon – 122 017 (Haryana). (Pan :Aaacs2554E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Skasham Agarwal, Ca Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2025 Date Of Order : 24.10.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)]Dated 04.01.2024 For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Original Return Of Income On 30.09.2012 Declaring An Income Of Rs.2,15,340/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny For The Year Under Consideration.

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, CIT DR

Section 132Section 147Section 148

which is the profit Loss account of the assessee-company for the year under consideration. He further submitted that the reason is based on borrowed satisfaction taken from the satisfaction of Investigation wing without application of mind. He also brought to our notice pages 108 to 110 which ... notice u/s 148 of the Act. He has proceeded to obtain jurisdiction without properly investigating the case of the assessee, in particular, with the borrowed satisfaction and without there being any material supplied by the investigation wing. Based on mere observations of the wing, he has proceeded to initiate

Bababhai Sadarbhai Shaikh, Ahmednagar vs. ITO Ward 1, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 144/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Bababhai Sadarbhai Shaikh Ito, Ward 1, Nr Goraba Takies Jamkhed, Vs. Ahmednagar Ahmednagar – 413201 Pan: Hozps1445M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas P Bora Department By : Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-10-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69A

144B of the Act, which governs the faceless assessment process. 4 d) The reopening of the assessment was based on presumption and surmises, reflecting borrowed satisfaction by the Ld. AO. e) Mere cash deposits in the bank account cannot per se justify the invocation of jurisdiction under Section

DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata vs. Rajesh Kumar Kedia, Kolkata

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

ITA 138/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M Surana &For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

relied upon by the department, thereby causing the miscarriage of justice. Besides, the reopening of the assessment has been made on the basis of borrowed satisfaction of investigation wing without any independent application of mind by the AO as there was no enquiry or application of mind

DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata vs. Rajesh Kumar Kedia, Kolkata

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

ITA 137/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M Surana &For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

M/S Sapphire Fintech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

ITA 593/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir JainFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. AR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

confirming the reopening assessment ignoring the fact that Ld. AO has reopened the assessment without application of mind and entire reopening is based on borrowed satisfaction of information received from investigation wing, hence such order of assessment passed u/s 147 is bad in law and liable to be deleted ... confirming the reopening assessment ignoring the fact that Ld. AO has reopened the assessment without application of mind and entire reopening is based on borrowed satisfaction of information received from investigation wing, hence such order of assessment passed u/s 147 is bad in law and liable to be deleted

M/S Sapphire Fintech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT -3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

ITA 592/MUM/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir JainFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. AR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata vs. Somani Services Private Limited, Kolkata

ITA 2220/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 250

live link between the information received from the Investigation Wing and the recording of satisfaction. Thus, there was no question of any “borrowed satisfaction”. It was the submission that in ITA No. 2220/Kol/2024 it was clearly recorded by the Ld. AO that information or details pertaining to M/s Shubh Suppliers ... that for both the cases, the Ld. AOs’ actions suffered from a legal fatality as they were based on mere change of opinion and borrowed satisfaction. The Ld. AR submitted a summarized version of his detailed written arguments, which may be reproduced to understand the assessee’s stand point