← 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

Panel Commerce Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1116/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

erred in holding that reopening of assessment was proper when it was reopened only on the basis of information received from Inv. Wing borrowed satisfaction, non-application of mind and after recording vague reasons. 2. For that the Ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the action ... there was any escapement to the income of the assessee. He stated that the reopening as made in the case of assessee is on borrowed satisfaction which is not permitted under the provisions of law by inviting our attention to the judgement rendered by the Hon’ble High Court

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

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

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

wing, in a mechanical manner and without application of independent mind is bad in law. 11. That the reasons recorded are a case of borrowed satisfaction since the Ld. AO has not conducted independent enquiries himself. It is a settled law that re-assessment proceedings cannot sustain

Shri Shivajirao R.Chavan, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(2), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 435/AHD/2005[1996-1997]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2024AY 1996-1997

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

case not being in accordance with provision of section 151 of the Act; 5 • that the satisfaction of the AO was not a borrowed satisfaction, and it was based on the report of the CBI of the disproportionate assets found with the assessee, which was shared with the Income ... 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. 20. Applying the law on reopening of assessments u/s 147 of the Act as noted above by us to the facts of the case

The ITO, Ward-13(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Shivajirao R.Chavan, Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 332/AHD/2005[1996-1997]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2024AY 1996-1997

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

case not being in accordance with provision of section 151 of the Act; 5 • that the satisfaction of the AO was not a borrowed satisfaction, and it was based on the report of the CBI of the disproportionate assets found with the assessee, which was shared with the Income ... 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. 20. Applying the law on reopening of assessments u/s 147 of the Act as noted above by us to the facts of the case

ACIT, Cir-1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Cheryl Advisory Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 2063/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Tanzil Padvekar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. H.M. Bhatt, Sr. DR
Section 153C

justified to allow the assessee's appeal as justified to allow the assessee's appeal as reopening of the assessment is based on borrowed satisfaction reopening of the assessment is based on borrowed satisfaction reopening of the assessment is based on borrowed satisfaction without appreciating the facts of the case ... challenged reassessment proceedings u/s , the assessee challenged reassessment proceedings u/s , the assessee challenged reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act on the ground of borrowed satisfaction. The assessee 147 of the Act on the ground of borrowed satisfaction. The assessee 147 of the Act on the ground of borrowed satisfaction

G.J. Holding Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1171/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1171/Chandi/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 G.J. Holding Pvt. Ltd. बनाम Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Ludhiana C/O G.S. Auto International Limited, G.S. Estate, G.T. Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacg6664K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri P.K. Goel & Sunil Arora, C.As राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2023 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2024 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.07.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana[Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following 2. Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Goel & Sunil Arora, C.AsFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

valid basis for reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment and hence notice issued U/s 148 on the basis of such vague reasons / borrowed satisfaction may be withdrawn. Hence, in view of the above, it is requested that proceedings as initiated may kindly be dropped. Thanking you” 7. However ... grab of share application money. That the Assessing Officer has simply relied upon the report of the investigation wing which was a borrowed satisfaction of the Assessing Officer,without independent application of mind to the facts of the case. It was pointed out that there were serious factual errors

Smt. Supriya Gupta., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-30(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1273/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

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

without even analyzing the records of the regular assessment proceedings and that such reopening of assessment was without independent application of mind and on borrowed satisfaction. 3 I.T.A. No. 1273/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2009-10 Smt. Supriya Gupta 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessment proceedings

Asif Khan, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-32(3), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1048/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

investigating authority is the documents for reopening. We relied on the order of Ashis Natvarlal Vashi(supra). The reopening was initiated on borrowed satisfaction, 7 I.T.A. No. 1048/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Asif Khan not on belief of the ld. AO. The ld. AO recorded the reason which warranted

Megahertz Systems Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 5 (2) (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2814/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhmegahertz Systems Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Private Limited, 251/253, Income Tax, Circle 5(2)(2) Tardeo Court, Opp. Swati Aayakar Bhavan, Snacks Tardeo Road Wrqh+C23, Maharshi Near Bhatia Hospital, Karve Road, New Marine Grant Road West, Lines, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 007 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aadcm8203F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ms. Indira Adakil Date Of Hearing 23.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

from the Sales Tax Department without any independent application of mind on the information received, thus the assessment was reopened on the basis of borrowed satisfaction 4. The CIT(A) failed to consider the fact that the impugned reassessment proceedings under section 147 was initiated merely on surmises and conjectures

ITO Ward - 4, Rohtak vs. Surender Dalal, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 7714/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7714/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Ito, Surender Dalal, Ward-4, Vs. Dalal Bhawan, Aayakar Bhawan, Rohtak, Haryana Near Petrol Pump, Gohana Road, Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aqlps2166C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7490/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Surender Dalal, Ito, Dalal Bhawan, Vs. Ward-4, Near Petrol Pump, Aayakar Bhawan, Gohana Road, Rohtak, Haryana Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aqlps2166C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

quashed as the same has been reopened on the basis of the reasons which are vague and has been recorded only on borrowed satisfaction. 5. On the fact and circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the order despite ... reasons were, in fact, in the form of conclusions “one after the other” and that the satisfaction arrived at by the AO was a “borrowed satisfaction" and at best “a reproduction of the conclusion in the investigation report.” 13. As in the above case, even in the present case

Surender Dalal, Rohtak vs. ITO Ward - 4, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 7490/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7714/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Ito, Surender Dalal, Ward-4, Vs. Dalal Bhawan, Aayakar Bhawan, Rohtak, Haryana Near Petrol Pump, Gohana Road, Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aqlps2166C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7490/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Surender Dalal, Ito, Dalal Bhawan, Vs. Ward-4, Near Petrol Pump, Aayakar Bhawan, Gohana Road, Rohtak, Haryana Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aqlps2166C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

quashed as the same has been reopened on the basis of the reasons which are vague and has been recorded only on borrowed satisfaction. 5. On the fact and circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the order despite ... reasons were, in fact, in the form of conclusions “one after the other” and that the satisfaction arrived at by the AO was a “borrowed satisfaction" and at best “a reproduction of the conclusion in the investigation report.” 13. As in the above case, even in the present case

ACIT, CC-2(1), Kol, Kolkata vs. Shalimar Hatcheries Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 546/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,......................Respondent 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, 17Th Floor, Everest House, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] - A N D - C.O. No. 13/Kol/2023 (In I.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,..................Cross Objector 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 35(1)(ii)

also well established law that the satisfaction with respect to escapement of assessment of income must be of the A.O. himself and not a borrowed satisfaction. If the proceedings u/s147 is initiated on the satisfaction recorded by some other authority, like Sales Tax, Excise or Director of Investigation without recording

The ACIT, Central Circle-1, Bhopal vs. DB Power Ltd, Bhopal

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 73/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Db Power Limited, Acit, Central Circle-1, बनाम/ Office Block, 1A, Bhopal Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Acit, Central Circle-1, M/S Db Power Limited, बनाम/ Bhopal Office Block, 1A, Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 56(2)(viib)Section 69C

confirming the action of the AO in issuance of the notice under s. 148 of the Act, merely on the basis of borrowed satisfaction of some other officer without having any satisfaction of his own on the subject issues. 1(c). That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both

DB Power Ltd, Bhopal vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-1, Bhopal

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 68/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Db Power Limited, Acit, Central Circle-1, बनाम/ Office Block, 1A, Bhopal Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Acit, Central Circle-1, M/S Db Power Limited, बनाम/ Bhopal Office Block, 1A, Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 56(2)(viib)Section 69C

confirming the action of the AO in issuance of the notice under s. 148 of the Act, merely on the basis of borrowed satisfaction of some other officer without having any satisfaction of his own on the subject issues. 1(c). That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both

Padam J Chalani, Chennai vs. ACIT, Centralcircle-3(4), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 602/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.602/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Padam J. Challani, Acit बनाम/ Vs. No.23/1, Habibullah Road, T.Nagar, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai-600 017. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aekpc-1816-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-12-2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

Judicial precedence of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 7. The Learned CIT(A) failed to establish the allegations on merits and has borrowed satisfaction from the Assessment Order. 8. The Learned CIT(A) despite being in receipt of corroborating evidence regarding the sale of alleged deficit amount of silver articles

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Ritesh Jain, Indore

ITA 794/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & It(Ss)Ano.14/Ind/2022 (Assesssment Year 2011-12

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

competent AO of share holder companies etc. We find that only on basis of investigation wing report (unconfronted to assessee) acting purely on borrowed satisfaction without any independent application of mind addition has been made u/s 68 by Ld AO. We find that no where in entire assessment order

Akik Marketing India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 2(1), New Delhi

ITA 4559/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2010-11 Akik Marketing India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, N-39, Ground Floor, Ward 2(1), Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 Pan : Aaaca6579K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gurjeet Singh, Ca & Shri Shantanu Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, CA &For Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 68

material facts’ containing 'material particulars' which Ld. AR alleges lacked on touch stone of the reading of the 'reasons to believe' resulting in a 'borrowed satisfaction'. 6.1 It was submitted that in reason recorded dt. 29/03/2017 AO has not applied his mind as the information received

Singhal Fabrics Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 632/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

account as income of the assessee. The ld. A.R. submitted that as regards reopening of the assessee’s case, the Assessing Officer has taken borrowed satisfaction and the reopening itself is bad in law/invalid. The ld. A.R. further submitted that no bifurcation of cheques was given as well ... entries. As regards the reopening, the reopening has validly done by the Assessing Officer after recording the reasons and the satisfaction is not a borrowed satisfaction as contemplated by the ld. A.R. Thus, ground no. 3 is dismissed. But to the merits of the case of the assessee, the assessee

All India Chess Federatiion, Chennai vs. ITO Exemptions Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 29/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.28, 29 & 30/Chny/2023 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 All India Chess Federation, The Income Tax Officer Hall No.70, Vs. (Exemptions), Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Ward-1, Chennai. Sydenhams Road, Periamet, Chennai – 600 003. [Pan: Aaaaa 2155P]

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 11

order of ITAT has been final. The Ld. AR has submitted that the A.O has reopened the case on the basis of borrowed satisfaction of CCI order and therefore, the reopening is not valid. The Ld. AR has argued that the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case ... reasons recorded and assessee’s arguments has upheld the reopening of the assessment. The main arguments of assessee has been that reopening was on borrowed satisfaction and there was no tangible material available with A.O. The assessee has argued that the Hon’ble ITAT in earlier years has held