“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

Sri. V. Raja Reddy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 5(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1157/BANG/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Muralimohan, CAFor Respondent: CIT DR & Shri Priyadarshi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

invalid Assessment Proceedings and shall be liable to be quashed. 13. The Ld. CIT (A) failed to appreciate that there exists no Live Link (or) Nexus in respect of Reasons Recorded for Re- opening of Assessment with that of Assessment framed U/s 147 of the Act. Such a failure shall

ACIT 4 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kotak Securities Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 7357/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2022AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh IraniFor Respondent: Smt. Neelam Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 73

open, 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 section 147 of the Act, as quoted hereinabove. Under ... view re- assessment proceedings have been initiated on account of mere change in opinion in absence of any fresh tangible material having live link with income escaping assessment. Accordingly, we hold that the re-assessment proceedings are invalid having been initiated in violation of the provisions of Section 147 read

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7214/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

indicate that any particular income has accrued to anyone as a result of such difference in prices. "There is, thus, no direct nexus or live link between the difference in prices and escapement of income." "There is, in other words, no way the Assessing Officer could have formed a belief ... down that the "reasons to believe must have rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of belief i.e. there must be a live link between material coming the notice of the Assessing Officer and the formation of belief regarding escapement of income". In para13 the Court further remarked

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7213/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7212/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

The Joint Lessees of Industrial Estate, Mumbai vs. ITO 20 (2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2797/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Joint Lessees Of Vs. Ito – 20(2)(1), Industrial Estate, Piramal Chambers, 1St Floor, Estate Bldg Ii Floor,Lalbaug, Lalbaug Industrial Mumbai – 400012 Estate, Dr B.A. Road, Mumbai – 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaaj7202Q Appellant .. Respondent Ito – 20(2)(1) Vs. The Joint Lessees Of Piramal Chambers, Industrial Estate, Ii Floor,Lalbaug, 1St Floor, Estate Bldg Mumbai – 400012 Lalbaug Industrial Estate, Dr B.A.Road, Mumbai – 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaaj7202Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant /Respondent By Shri G.P Mehta.Ar : Respondent/Appellant By Shri T. Shankar.Dr : Date Of Hearing 11.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153Section 24(1)(a)Section 50C

I.T.Act,1961, by the learned Assessing Officer and upheld by the learned CIT(A) is ab-initio void, inasmuch as, no material having live link with the formation of belief, was available on record, prior to issue of impugned notice. Consequently the assessment order passed in pursuance of aforesaid notice

Hsbc Asset Management (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.1 raised by assessee is allowed and assessment order framed found to be without jurisdiction

ITA 7292/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalhsbc Asset Management (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Mercantile Bank Chamber, 16 Veer Nariman, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aabch0007N ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-1(1)(2) Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Niraj Sheth, Ar Respondent By : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit (A)’] Vide Order Dated 13.10.2017 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Distinct & Separate & Without Prejudice To Each Other. 1. On The Facts & In Law, The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - 6, Mumbai [‘Cit(A)’] Erred In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Initiated After Four Years From The End Of Relevant Assessment Year, Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Made & The Appellant Had Disclosed Fully & Truly All Material Facts Necessary

For Appellant: Sh. Niraj Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 37(1)Section 40A(9)

open, 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." (f) The Supreme Court has also held in CIT v. Burlop Dealers Ltd. (79 ITR 609) that: “Mere disclosure

Areen Consultants P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 10(3), Mumbai

ITA 3544/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satish Mody

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

M/S. Nitesh Estates Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed on legal issue raised in ground no

ITA 1486/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Nitesh Estates The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of Nitesh Time Square, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, #8, M.G. Road, Circle – 5 [1][2], Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcn9267C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 28/03/2019 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-5, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2009-10 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Order Of Re-Assessment Is Bad In Law & Void-Ab- Initio For Want Of Requisite Jurisdiction Especially, The Mandatory Requirements To Assume Jurisdiction U/S 148 Of The Act Did Not Exist & Have Not Been Complied With & Consequently, The Re-Assessment Requires To Be Cancelled. 3. The Learned Cit[A] Ought To Have Appreciated That There Was No Fresh Material To Show That Income Had Escaped Assessment Especially When There Was A Scrutiny

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234

objective reasons should lead to the formation of the subjective belief that, income escaped assessment. Thus Ld.AR submitted that, there must be a live link between the reasons recorded and material, based on which the reassessment proceedings are to be initiated. He placed reliance on the following decision in support ... tangible material" to come to the conclusion that there is Page 13 of 17 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 Section 147 of the Act, as quoted hereinabove. Under

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 313/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

cannot be basis for addition. ITA Nos.309 to 313 & 1494 to 1497/Bang/2018 Page 22 of 52 The AO has to establish the live link between CD and other collateral evidence collected during the course of search action. Accordingly, the issue is remitted to the AO for fresh consideration and decision

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 312/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri.H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri. H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 310/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri.H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 309/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

Shri H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1497/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

Shri H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1496/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

Shri H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1495/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

Shri H B Sudarshan, Chikkamangalur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are dismissed and revenue’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1494/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153A

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 270/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

record from which the requisite belief could be formed by him and further whether that material had any rational connection or a live link for the formation of the requisite belief. If there is no rational and intelligible nexus between the reasons and the belief, the conclusion would be inescapable

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 269/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154