← All Phrases

“live link”

Judicial DoctrinesReopening / 147Reopening / 1471,109 judgments

The decision most relied on for live link is ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (103 ITR 437), cited in 721 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on live link

ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das
103 ITR 437 · 1976 · Supreme Court
721
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings, the 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment must be based on some material and not mere suspicion, establishing a live link between the information and the belief. Furthermore, for reassessment beyond four years, there must be a specific finding of the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts.

CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd.
354 ITR 536 · 2013 · High Court
366
citing judgments

Reassessment of income, especially after a summary assessment under Section 143(1), requires the Assessing Officer to possess fresh, tangible material to form a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment; a mere reappraisal of existing records or a change of opinion without new material is not permissible.

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.

PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.
396 ITR 5 · 2017 · High Court
272
citing judgments

Reassessment based solely on information from the Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer conducting further inquiry or demonstrating an independent application of mind, is unjustified and invalid.

CIT v. Foramer France
264 ITR 566 · 2003 · Supreme Court
253
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year are invalid unless the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Without such failure, the notice issued under Section 148 is time-barred and without jurisdiction.

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.

153 (Gujarat) 8 Shakti Karnawat v. ITO
296 ITR 90 · 2008 · High Court
171
citing judgments

A live link of third-party information can form the basis for reopening an assessment under Section 148, provided it contains material facts necessary for assessment. The Assessing Officer must demonstrate a "reason to believe" that income has escaped assessment, which can be satisfied by such information even if it pertains to other assessees or relates to accommodation entries.

Kalyanji Mavji & Co. v. CIT
102 ITR 287 · 1976 · Supreme Court
137
citing judgments

The Supreme Court broadly defined 'information' for reassessment under Section 147 to include new facts, external sources, material already on record, or a correct understanding of law from judicial decisions. This definition enables reopening assessments based on subsequent information or mistakes.

Judgments citing live link

Dsd Noell Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 255/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

Section 271Section 44BSection 9Section 9(1)(vii)

applicable, it is necessary that the services not only be utilized within India, but also be rendered in India or have such a "live link" with India that the entire income from fees as envisaged in Article 12 of DTAA becomes taxable in India.” Since, subsequent to the decision

Dsd Noell Gmbh, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3186/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

Section 271Section 44BSection 9Section 9(1)(vii)

applicable, it is necessary that the services not only be utilized within India, but also be rendered in India or have such a "live link" with India that the entire income from fees as envisaged in Article 12 of DTAA becomes taxable in India.” Since, subsequent to the decision

Cricket Australia, Australia vs. DCIT, Int, Taxation Circle-1(2)(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 605/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194E

Assessing Officer for reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act clearly reveals that the formation of belief has neither any live link or nexus with any tangible material available on record rather the reasons recorded are based on non- existent/completely irrelevant facts. In fact, while disposing

Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 5623/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usshri Rajesh Kumar Vs. Jcit 1/3256, Ram Nagar, Range – 45, Mandoli Road, Shahdara New Delhi Delhi-110032 Pan No. Agfpk 1653 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Y. K. Kapoor, Adv. Revenue By Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2023

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 24Section 54B

clear change of opinion not permissible in law. Furthermore, no outside material has come to the knowledge of Assessing Officer which have a live link with the reasons for reopening. Accordingly, we hold that the reasons of reopening are not valid and accordingly, assessment order issued is quashed. Since

Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(7), Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 530/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.530/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, Vs. The Ito, 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Ward-2(3)(7), Jin Shanti Building, Surat Surat – 395003, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpd0064M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 12/10/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2023

Section 132Section 144Section 147Section 148

providing accommodation entry by Bhanwarlal Jain Group. No specific information about the accommodation entry obtained by assessee was received by AO. There is no live link between the reasons recorded qua the assessee. Therefore, the re-opening is invalid and all subsequent action is liable to be set aside ... accommodation entry by Bhanwarlal Jain Group. And that there was no specific information about the accommodation entry availed by the assessee. There is no live link between the reasons recorded qua the assessee. We find that the assessee has raised objection against the validity of the reopening before

Cricket South Africa (Npc), South Africa vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 604/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 194ESection 195

recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act clearly reveals that the formation of belief has no live link or nexus with any tangible material available on record. Rather the reasons recorded are based on either non-existent or completely irrelevant facts

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Raipur vs. Meserss T.C. Buildcon Private Limited, Raipur

In the result CO filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 173/RPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Tc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Vasudev, B-5, Sector-5, Raipur, (C.G.) Devendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aacct4516F Cross Objection No. 26/Rpr/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 173/Rpr/2019) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Tc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Vasudev, B-5, Sector-5, Raipur, (C.G.) Devendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aacct4516F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16-08-2023 घोषणाक" तार"ख/Date : 27-10-2023 Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

that these reasons lack validity. The first and foremost, reasons themselves record merely the transaction and nothing more. Quite apart from there not being live link between the first portion of the reasons recorded, namely, by merely duplicating the recording of transaction of transfer of sizable number of shares having

The Income Tax Officer Ward, 2, Raigarh(Cg) vs. Shri Shri Bishambhar Dayal Agrawal, Jashpur (C.G.)

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 223/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 223/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer-2, Raigarh (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 41(4)Section 69

reopen, provided there is "tangible material" to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons must have a live link with the formation of the belief. Our view gets support from the changes made to s. 147 of the Act, as quoted hereinabove. Under

Income Tax Officer, Surat vs. Magnifique Gems Private Limited, Surat

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

ITA 458/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.389 & 458/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Magnifique Gems Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 105, Rajshree Building, Maniyara 1(1)(4), Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Sheri Na Naka,Mahidharpura, Near Majura Gate, Opp. New Surat-395003. Civil Hospital, Surat-395001

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

providing accommodation entry by Bhanwarlal Jain Group. No specific information about the accommodation entry obtained by assessee was received by AO. There is no live link between the reasons recorded qua the assessee. Therefore, the re-opening is invalid and all subsequent action is liable to be set aside ... accommodation entry by Bhanwarlal Jain Group. And that there was no specific information about the accommodation entry availed by the assessee. There is no live link between the reasons recorded qua the assessee. We find that the assessee has raised objection against the validity of the reopening before

Magnifique Gems Private Limited, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1)(4), Surat

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

ITA 389/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.389 & 458/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Magnifique Gems Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 105, Rajshree Building, Maniyara 1(1)(4), Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Sheri Na Naka,Mahidharpura, Near Majura Gate, Opp. New Surat-395003. Civil Hospital, Surat-395001

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

providing accommodation entry by Bhanwarlal Jain Group. No specific information about the accommodation entry obtained by assessee was received by AO. There is no live link between the reasons recorded qua the assessee. Therefore, the re-opening is invalid and all subsequent action is liable to be set aside ... accommodation entry by Bhanwarlal Jain Group. And that there was no specific information about the accommodation entry availed by the assessee. There is no live link between the reasons recorded qua the assessee. We find that the assessee has raised objection against the validity of the reopening before

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbaicircle-32(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 979/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

while recording the reasons for reopening of the assessment. The AO has recorded incorrect amount which escaped assessment. The reasons failed to demonstrate the live link between the alleged tangible material and the formation of belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The decisions relied upon Ld. Counsel

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt CIT, Circle-32(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 981/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

while recording the reasons for reopening of the assessment. The AO has recorded incorrect amount which escaped assessment. The reasons failed to demonstrate the live link between the alleged tangible material and the formation of belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The decisions relied upon Ld. Counsel

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commisssioner of Income Tax, Circle-32(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 980/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

while recording the reasons for reopening of the assessment. The AO has recorded incorrect amount which escaped assessment. The reasons failed to demonstrate the live link between the alleged tangible material and the formation of belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The decisions relied upon Ld. Counsel

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt CIT, Circle-32(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 977/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

while recording the reasons for reopening of the assessment. The AO has recorded incorrect amount which escaped assessment. The reasons failed to demonstrate the live link between the alleged tangible material and the formation of belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The decisions relied upon Ld. Counsel

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt CIT, Circle-32(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 976/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

while recording the reasons for reopening of the assessment. The AO has recorded incorrect amount which escaped assessment. The reasons failed to demonstrate the live link between the alleged tangible material and the formation of belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The decisions relied upon Ld. Counsel

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-32(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 975/MUM/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

while recording the reasons for reopening of the assessment. The AO has recorded incorrect amount which escaped assessment. The reasons failed to demonstrate the live link between the alleged tangible material and the formation of belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The decisions relied upon Ld. Counsel

Hartron Sase Communications Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 1064/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 68Section 69C

other. The expression accommodation entry has been used without explaining the basis for such a conclusion. He vehemently pointed out that the crucial live link between the information made available to the AO and the formation of the belief is absent. The ld. AR also contended that the reasons must

Shark Packaging (India) Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed only on ground no

ITA 2163/DEL/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 46ASection 68Section 69C

because then it would amount to "borrowed satisfaction" which cannot be the basis for issue of notice u/s 148. While the need for a live link between the information received and formation of belief by the Assessing Officer is paramount, the information so received can only raise a suspicion

Shark Packaging (India) Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 23(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed only on ground no

ITA 8310/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 46ASection 68Section 69C

because then it would amount to "borrowed satisfaction" which cannot be the basis for issue of notice u/s 148. While the need for a live link between the information received and formation of belief by the Assessing Officer is paramount, the information so received can only raise a suspicion

Shark Packaging (India) Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 23(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed only on ground no

ITA 8309/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 46ASection 68Section 69C

because then it would amount to "borrowed satisfaction" which cannot be the basis for issue of notice u/s 148. While the need for a live link between the information received and formation of belief by the Assessing Officer is paramount, the information so received can only raise a suspicion