← All Phrases

“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

Dinesh Jat, Sagar vs. CIT(A), NFAC

ITA 196/JAB/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jaiswal Sancheti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69A

assessment under section 147 is purely based on AIR-reported bank deposits without any independent verification or tangible evidence. This amounts to a borrowed satisfaction, which has been consistently held by judicial forums (including Harmeet Singh vs. ITO) as invalid and unsustainable in law. 5. Addition

Dinesh Jat, Sagar vs. CIT (A), Sagar

ITA 195/JAB/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jaiswal Sancheti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69A

assessment under section 147 is purely based on AIR-reported bank deposits without any independent verification or tangible evidence. This amounts to a borrowed satisfaction, which has been consistently held by judicial forums (including Harmeet Singh vs. ITO) as invalid and unsustainable in law. 5. Addition

Aditi Mitra, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 37(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 25/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Aug 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 25/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Aditi Mitra,…………………………………...……Appellant Flat No. 401, Block No. 12, Ujaas, The Condoville, 69, S.K. Deb Road, Kolkata-700048, West Bengal [Pan:Aczpb6415H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-37(3), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 148Section 183Section 282Section 68

action of the Assessing Officer in the initiation of proceedings and issue of notice u/s. 147/148 which was illegal, mechanical, based on borrowed satisfaction, without application of mind, and unsustainable in law as well as on merits. Tax Effect - N.A. (5) That, on the facts and circumstances of the case ... grounds:- (1) That on the facts and in law, the approval granted by the Income Tax Authority u/s 151 was illegal, mechanical, based on borrowed satisfaction, without application of mind, and bad in law. Thus the assessment order be cancelled/quashed. Tax Effect - N.A. (2) That, on the facts

DCIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Inventure Growth & Securities Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross-objection of the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 4163/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

objection, has assailed the very validity of reopening under section 147, raising grounds that the reopening was without proper jurisdiction and based merely on borrowed satisfaction, and therefore contrary to law. 4. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee is a listed company duly registered with SEBI

Rnam Finlease Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 15(1), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7969/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

supra) is reproduced:- “6.7 In our considered view, the Ld AR has correctly argued that the reasons in present case are based on borrowed satisfaction of CIT (Central)/income tax investigation wing which is loosely referred to as "Aseem Gupta search operation u/s 132 of the Act". Here ... important to highlight the striking features of the reasons recorded case which show that 3 ITAs No.7968 & 7969/Del/2019 the reasons are based on borrowed satisfaction only: firstly reasons start with some search operation conducted on one Shri Aseem Gupta on 26.03.2010. What are the important findings of said search operations

Rnam Finlease Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 15(1), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7968/DEL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

supra) is reproduced:- “6.7 In our considered view, the Ld AR has correctly argued that the reasons in present case are based on borrowed satisfaction of CIT (Central)/income tax investigation wing which is loosely referred to as "Aseem Gupta search operation u/s 132 of the Act". Here ... important to highlight the striking features of the reasons recorded case which show that 3 ITAs No.7968 & 7969/Del/2019 the reasons are based on borrowed satisfaction only: firstly reasons start with some search operation conducted on one Shri Aseem Gupta on 26.03.2010. What are the important findings of said search operations

Rnam Finlease Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7895/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

supra) is reproduced:- “6.7 In our considered view, the Ld AR has correctly argued that the reasons in present case are based on borrowed satisfaction of CIT (Central)/income tax investigation wing which is loosely referred to as "Aseem Gupta search operation u/s 132 of the Act". Here ... important to highlight the striking features of the reasons recorded case which show that 3 ITAs No.7968 & 7969/Del/2019 the reasons are based on borrowed satisfaction only: firstly reasons start with some search operation conducted on one Shri Aseem Gupta on 26.03.2010. What are the important findings of said search operations

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Aayakar Bhavan Vejalpur vs. Vipul Jagdishbhai Patel(HUF), Naranpura Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1324/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1324/Ahd/2025 A/W. Cross Objection No. 59/Ahd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बनाम/ Income Tax Officer Vipul Jagdishbhai Patel Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad (Huf) Vs. A-302, Aryan-2, Nr. Kabir School, B/H. St. Xaviers School, Naranpura, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380013 & Vipul Jagdishbhai Patel Income Tax Officer (Huf) Ward-2(1)(2), A-302, Aryan-2, Nr. Kabir Ahmedabad School, B/H. St. Xaviers School, Naranpura, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaghv7848P (Appellant / Cross Objector) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kirit P Shah, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/08/2025 O R D E R The Present Appeal Of The Revenue & Cross Objection Of The Assessee Are Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/Jcit (A)-1, Siliguri (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”), Dated 30.03.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) & Relate To Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13. Ita No. 1324/Ahd/2025 A/W. Co No. 59/Ahd/2025 [Vipul Jagdishbhai Patel (Huf)] A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 – 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Delayed For Filing By 16 Days. The Ao Has Explained The Cause Of Delay As Being Preoccupied In Pressing Matters Including Time Barring Matters, High Court Matters & Others. Considering The Smallness Of The Delay, We Consider It Fit To Condone The Delay. Order Was Pronounced In The Open Court.

For Appellant: Shri Kirit P Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Kulkarni, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250

apply his mind to the information in his possession and his satisfaction of escapement of income of the assessee was nothing but a borrowed satisfaction. When the assessee had categorically pointed out to the AO that the bank account mentioned in the reasons did not pertain

Primerose Traders Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2276/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

opening proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, 1961 and issued notice under section 148 of the IT Act 1961. This is nothing but "borrowed satisfaction". As per following 5 Primerose Traders Pvt. Ltd. case laws any action on the basis of "borrowed satisfaction" is erroneous ... issue of notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 by the AO on the basis of borrowed satisfaction is erroneous and bad in law. So humble prayer is that the erroneous and bad in law initiation of reopening proceedings and issue of notice

Suresh Kumar Agrawal, Raigarh vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 481/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.481/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Suresh Kumar Agrawal Lal Tanki, Bus Stand Road, Near Satkar Sales, 1St Floor, Raigarh (C.G.)-496 001 Pan: Acipa0882G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Birendra Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153D

hand, there is no independent satisfaction of the competent authority in issuing such approval and on the other hand, it is only borrowed satisfaction from the A.O, based on which, such approval 6 Suresh Kumar Agrawal Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur u/s.153D of the Act has been granted summarily ... Kumar Agrawal; and (ii) Sr. No. 2: Smt. Mamta Agrawal and Sr.No.2 is the appellant assessee before this Bench. Rather, it is only borrowed satisfaction from the A.O due to which the approval u/s.153D of the Act was granted summarily in the case of the assessee which vitiates such

Praveen Sitaram Agarwal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-24(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3454/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

also assailed the validity of the notice issued under section 148, contending that the reassessment proceedings were initiated purely on the basis of borrowed satisfaction without any independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer. It is further contended that no statutory notice under section 143(2) was issued pursuant

Hari Singh Chauhan, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer 3(5), Aayakar Bhawan

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 344/LKW/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2012-13 Hari Singh Chouhan V. The Income Tax Officer 3(5) 1, Naramau Kanpur Kanpur Nagar (U.P) Tan/Pan:Askpc3749A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Srhi Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: Srhi Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 55A

147/143(3) as upheld by the CIT(A) be quashed. 2. Because the entire reassessment proceedings have been initiated on the basis of borrowed satisfaction and there being no inquiry or independent satisfaction of the AO, approval accorded being mechanical, the reassessment framed is without jurisdiction

Income Tax Officer, Kolkata vs. Shivrashi Vanijya Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal is hereby treated as allowed

ITA 1098/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148(2)Section 253Section 68

issued on 28.07.2022 after four years from the end of the assessment year. The AR submits that the notice u/s 148 was issued on borrowed satisfaction. First notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 29.06.2021 and thereafter intimation letter for notice u/s 148 was issued

Falgun Mahesh Oza, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, grounds of appeal of assesse is allowed

ITA 2970/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Falgun Mahesh Oza Ito, Ward – 22(1)(1), Mumbai 3Rdfloow, Nandan Villa Model Town Vs Society Chs, Gulmohar Cross Road No. 7, Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Mumbai – 400049. [Pan: Aaapo 0474 A] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

change of opinion is not permissible. In alternative submission, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that reopening cannot be based solely on borrowed satisfaction. The assessing officer solely relied on 6 Falgun Mahesh Oza the information received from ADIT (Inv.) Ahmedabad and disallowed the genuine loss. The assessing officer

Sarena Private Limited, Delhi vs. PCIT Central, Delhi-3, Delhi

ITA 2480/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambareesha Agrawal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

Sarena Private Limited, Delhi vs. Pr, CIT Centre Delhi-3, Delhi

ITA 2479/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambareesha Agrawal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

ACIT, Circle-26(2), New Delhi vs. Vikram Electric Equipment P.Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 4651/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shir Mahavir Singh() Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

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

absence of any tangible material or independent enquiry to establish any case income escaping assessment income, the notice u/s 148 on the basis of borrowed satisfaction is untenable and bad in law. (iii) That the allegation of money laundering being factually incorrect and unsubstantiated, the entire basis 4 I.T.A

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Danaram Jivaram Choudhary, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2049/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT.DRFor Respondent: Shri M. K. Patel, AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 69A

DDIT(Inv.), Unit- 1(2), Ahmedabad. That the AO’s satisfaction of income of the assessee escaping assessment was a mere borrowed satisfaction, the AO being found to have made no independent enquiry or investigation on the information which was passed on to him by the DDIT (Inv) regarding ... from the above factual findings of the Ld. CIT(A) that he had arrived at a correct conclusion that the reopening was based on borrowed satisfaction and the AO had not applied his mind at all to the information in his possession for forming belief of escapement of income

Sunshine Technobuild Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

Accordingly ground no. 1 raised by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 592/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153ASection 153C

reasons recorded which are vague, incorrect and are based on suspicion, surmises, presumptions and conjectures only. 4. On the basis of a borrowed satisfaction from the investigation wing and merely repeating the facts recorded by the investigation wing without establishing any direct link between the tangible material and the formation

Merrmax Software and Systems Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 4087/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4087/Mum/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2012-13 Merrmax Software & Systems Private Limited C/O. Veeta Legal Services, 7 Raheja Centre, Ground Floor, Fpj Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Pan : Aaecm2026K

For Appellant: Shri Kaushik Makwana, CAFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 156Section 69A

reason to believe that any income has escaped assessment. ii. Without prejudice to the above, the present reassessment proceeding was on the basis of borrowed satisfaction and that there is no independent application of mind by the Ld. AO. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case