← 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

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle 6(1)(1), Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2536, 2537 &

ITA 2538/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

ground. The ld. AR argued that the reassessment in the present case is bad in law and void since the same is based on borrowed satisfaction and simply on 6 ITAs No.2536, 2537,2538 & 2542 /Mum/2023 ASG Capital Services Pvt Ltd the basis of some information from the investigation wing ... Bombay), Reynolds Shirting Ltd. v/s ACIT – (2022) 285 Taxman 554 (Bombay), et. al. holding that re-assessment simply based on borrowed satisfaction of another officer / Investigation Wing and without any independent enquiry deserves to be quashed. 6.1. The ld. AR argued on the merits of addition u/s 68 are concerned

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle -6(1)(1)-Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

ITA 2537/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

ground. The Id. AR argued that the reassessment in the present case is bad in law and void since the same is based on borrowed satisfaction and simply on the basis of some information from the investigation wing, which has not been provided to the assessee till date ... Bombay), Reynolds Shirting Ltd. v/s ACIT (2022) 285 Taxman 554 (Bombay), et. al. holding that re-assessment simply based on borrowed satisfaction of another officer / Investigation Wing and without any independent enquiry deserves to be quashed. 6.1. The Id. AR argued on the merits of addition u/s 68 are concerned

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2536, 2537 &

ITA 2536/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

ground. The ld. AR argued that the reassessment in the present case is bad in law and void since the same is based on borrowed satisfaction and simply on 6 ITAs No.2536, 2537,2538 & 2542 /Mum/2023 ASG Capital Services Pvt Ltd the basis of some information from the investigation wing ... Bombay), Reynolds Shirting Ltd. v/s ACIT – (2022) 285 Taxman 554 (Bombay), et. al. holding that re-assessment simply based on borrowed satisfaction of another officer / Investigation Wing and without any independent enquiry deserves to be quashed. 6.1. The ld. AR argued on the merits of addition u/s 68 are concerned

M/S. Krishna Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 7(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/KOL/2023[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Judicial Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Accountant Member)

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

settled position in law that re- opening notice has to be issued by the Assessing Office on his own satisfaction and not on borrowed satisfaction.” 8. We after considering the facts on the record find that the AO has merely issued the reopening notice on the basis of intimation regarding ... breach of settled position of law that reopening notice has to be issued by the AO on his own satisfaction and not on borrowed satisfaction. Therefore, set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition as made in the case

Padam Kumar Goyal, Tonk vs. ITO Ward-Tonk, Income Tax Department, Tonk

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

ITA 581/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Kataria (C.A)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

discussion about the cash deposits and credits in the current account of the appellant. It is further stated that it is a case of borrowed satisfaction as the AO has relied upon the report of the Investigation Wing and did not cause any inquiry himself. The Id AR has cited ... enquiries were made by the investigation wing only and the ld. AO only relied upon the same. Thus this is a clear case of borrowed satisfaction which is not permissible as per law. Therefore, the entire reassessment proceedings are bad in law and on facts of the present case

Goyal Vegoils Limited, Kasar, Kota vs. DCIT, Circle -2, Kota

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

ITA 243/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

thereafter u/s 143(3) r.w.s.148. From the reasons recorded, it is clear that the impugned reopening proceedings were on the borrowed satisfaction. No independent opinion was formed by Assessing Officer in the assessee’s case under consideration. Under the circumstances, the assumption of the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under ... settled position of law that reopening notice has to be issued by the Assessing Officer on his own satisfaction and not on borrowed satisfaction. 16 Goyal Vegoils Ltd. vs. DCIT In view of the above submission and case laws, the reopening of the case and the consequent reassessment order

Kissan Fats Ltd., Bathinda vs. DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 408/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250(6)Section 253

prima facie belief of escapement of income on the basis of indubitable and credible information in respect of the assessee. Therefore, it was never borrowed satisfaction and reassessment proceedings were opened on well justifiable belief and satisfactory reasons. All the essential parameters for reopening the case of the assessee were

Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Surat, Gujrat vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

ITA 759/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

absence of any material information not found to be filed before the Ld. AO in the assessment proceedings, the reopening proceedings are merely on borrowed satisfaction and change of opinion.Therefore, the reassessment Page 7 of 31 I.T.A. No. 757 to 759/Kol/2022 A Ys: 2011-12 to 2013-14, Purple Suppliers ... accepted the sales to M/s. SDPL. This fact in itself makes the picture very clear that reopening has been carried out based only on borrowed satisfaction and a mere change of opinion. Though various judgments have been referred by Ld. Counsel for the assessee, we will first take note

Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Surat, Gujrat vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

ITA 758/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

absence of any material information not found to be filed before the Ld. AO in the assessment proceedings, the reopening proceedings are merely on borrowed satisfaction and change of opinion.Therefore, the reassessment Page 7 of 31 I.T.A. No. 757 to 759/Kol/2022 A Ys: 2011-12 to 2013-14, Purple Suppliers ... accepted the sales to M/s. SDPL. This fact in itself makes the picture very clear that reopening has been carried out based only on borrowed satisfaction and a mere change of opinion. Though various judgments have been referred by Ld. Counsel for the assessee, we will first take note

Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Surat, Gujrat vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

ITA 757/KOL/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

absence of any material information not found to be filed before the Ld. AO in the assessment proceedings, the reopening proceedings are merely on borrowed satisfaction and change of opinion.Therefore, the reassessment Page 7 of 31 I.T.A. No. 757 to 759/Kol/2022 A Ys: 2011-12 to 2013-14, Purple Suppliers ... accepted the sales to M/s. SDPL. This fact in itself makes the picture very clear that reopening has been carried out based only on borrowed satisfaction and a mere change of opinion. Though various judgments have been referred by Ld. Counsel for the assessee, we will first take note

Gurinder Singh, Kharar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Apeals, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Aug 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 137/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 बनाम Gurinder Singh, The Ito, Village Jhungian, Ward-6(1), Post Office Jandpur Chandigarh Kharar-140301 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ckyps1280G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Sharma, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh Danish Abdullah, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2024 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Sh Danish Abdullah, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

transfer of amount of Rs. 35 lacs by Shri Pritpal Singh through RTGS. Therefore, reopening in this case was based on wrong facts and borrowed satisfaction without co-relating the said information with the accounts of the Assessee. Therefore, the same falls short of the reasons to believe that

M/S Fancy Enterprises, Kolkata vs. A.O. Cir. 32, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

ITA 797/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm M/S Fancy Enterprises Ao,Circle-2 2, Ganesh Chandra, Income Tax Office Avenue, Bentick Street, 10B Middleton, Calcutta Vs. Commerce House West Bengal-700071 West Bengal-700 013 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaff5111B Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Officer and the same were examined and found to be correct. It is also submitted that the learned Assessing Officer has merely acted on borrowed satisfaction and has not applied his mind which is evident from the fact that out of 8 transactions mentioned in the above table, the assessee ... assessee and for the remaining there is no connection whatsoever with the assessee. It clearly indicates that the learned Assessing Officer has acted on borrowed satisfaction i.e., the information of the investigation wing and without making proper application of mind i.e., without examining the assessment records available with the learned

Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), Kolkata.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 637/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 & I.T.A. No. 1067/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,…Respondent Pcit, Kolkata-2, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

Copy of full information was not supplied. (vii) The satisfaction recorded in the instant case is not the AO’s own satisfaction but a borrowed satisfaction and without application of mind. (viii) There is no live link between the reasons recorded u/s 148 of the Act and belief of escapement

Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. P.C.I.T., Kolkata - 2, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1067/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 & I.T.A. No. 1067/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,…Respondent Pcit, Kolkata-2, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

Copy of full information was not supplied. (vii) The satisfaction recorded in the instant case is not the AO’s own satisfaction but a borrowed satisfaction and without application of mind. (viii) There is no live link between the reasons recorded u/s 148 of the Act and belief of escapement

Champion Builder Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly

ITA 462/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 68

conclusions of the AO are at I.T.A.Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 best a reproduction of the conclusion in the Investigation Report and indeed it is a borrowed satisfaction. The reasons failed to demonstrate the link between the tangible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment ... escaped assessment. The conclusions of the AO are at best a reproduction of the conclusion in the investigation report. Indeed it is a 'borrowed satisfaction'. The reasons fail to demonstrate the link between the tangible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment

Uma Shanker Sharma, Vrindavan, Mathura vs. ITO, Ward 2, ITO WD Two, Bharatpur

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

ITA 914/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Board (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

bank account. In this regard it is submitted that it is a settled position of law that notice u/s. 148 cannot be issued on borrowed satisfaction. 2. That the Id. CIT(A) should have cancelled the notice u/s. 148 as well as the relevant - assessment order because by reading

Dhanuka Realty Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 202/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 56(1)Section 56(2)

market value. In this regard it is submitted that it is a settled position of law that notice u/s. 148 cannot be issued on borrowed satisfaction and as such the Id. CIT(A) ought to have cancelled the notice u/s. 148 and the relevant assessment order. 6 DHANUKA REALTY

Chandra Shekhar, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 863/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari (Accountant Member), Shri Soundararajan K. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja Maru, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kiran D., Addl. CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

Search proceeding initiated under section 132 of the Income Tax Act 1961 is null and void ab initio. The search was initiated on the borrowed satisfaction of the DRI Show Cause Notice. The CIT (A) has relied on precedents passed by courts lower to Supreme Court, wherein the contention ... Page 104 of the CIT (A) order even more so as there isn't any other incriminating material. The AO has acted on borrowed satisfaction from the SCN of the DRI. The Evidence is circumstantial at its best. 12. The additions where section 68 is the charging section the same

Jain Machine Tools, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 26(1)(7), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2110/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jain Machine Tools, Ito, Ward 26(1)(7), 16, Meghal Industrial Estate, Room 625, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Vs. Devidayal Road, Mulund (West) Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G Block, Mumbai-400080. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aacfj 6163 H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Devendra Jain
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Assessing Officer of (A) has erred in upholding the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer of issuing notice u/s 148 on borrowed satisfaction merely relying on the issuing notice u/s 148 on borrowed satisfaction merely relying on the issuing notice u/s 148 on borrowed satisfaction merely relying on the basis

Krishna Murthy Ella, Hyderabad vs. DCIT-Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 585/HYD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.585/Hyd/2023 & Sa No.10/Hyd/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.585/Hyd/2023) (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Krishna Murthy Ella Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 1(2) Pan:Aacpe6389G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)

learned CIT (A), the assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment on the ground that the assessment has been reopened on the basis of borrowed satisfaction without there being any independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer which is Page ... erred in upholding the reopening of the assessment without appreciating the fact that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment purely based upon the borrowed satisfaction without performing necessary inquiries or Page 8 of 18 ITA No 585 of 2023 and SA No 10 of 2024 Krishna Murthy Ella inspection