← All Phrases

“reasons recorded”

ReassessmentSection 148Section 14813,127 judgments

The decision most relied on for reasons recorded is Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar (268 ITR 332), cited in 695 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reasons recorded

Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar
268 ITR 332 · 2004 · High Court
695
citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147, by issuing a notice under Section 148, must be judged solely on the reasons originally recorded by the Assessing Officer. These recorded reasons cannot be supplemented, improved upon, or modified at any later stage.

T.S. Balaram ITO v. Volkart Bros.
82 ITR 50 · 1971 · Supreme Court
382
citing judgments

A mistake apparent from the record under Section 154 must be an obvious and patent error, not one that requires a long and elaborate process of reasoning or where two opinions are conceivable. Rectification under Section 154 is not permissible for re-examining issues already considered or requiring detailed re-computation.

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

Reassessment proceedings are invalid if initiated based on documents already available on record without fresh tangible material, and if the sanction under section 151 is accorded mechanically, indicating non-application of mind.

M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr.
300 ITR 403 · 2008 · Supreme Court
268
citing judgments

The requirement of statutory prior approval by a high-ranking authority, even if administrative, serves as an in-built protection against arbitrary exercise of power by the Assessing Officer. While such approval need not record elaborate reasoning, the approving authority has a heavy duty to ensure it is not an empty ritual, fulfilling its purpose of supervisory control.

Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company v. CIT
308 ITR 38 · 2009 · High Court
248
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings are invalid if the reasons recorded for initiating action under section 148 are not served on the assessee within the limitation period prescribed by section 149. Furthermore, reassessment cannot be based on a mere change of opinion without tangible material, particularly when the assessee has made a full and true disclosure of material facts.

Pepsi Foods (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
367 ITR 112 · 2014 · High Court
225
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, a specific satisfaction note by the Assessing Officer of the person searched, recorded prior to initiating proceedings, is a jurisdictional prerequisite, rendering its absence void. The approval function under Section 153D is administrative and does not require elaborate reasoning.

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.

Judgments citing reasons recorded

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

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

ITA 7588/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

from various vendors, who were listed in the web site of sales tax department as hawala dealers by the Sales Tax Department. Copy of Reasons recorded for Re-opening of Assessment was also given to the assessee. During the year assessee had made purchases from bogus suppliers amounting to Rs.4 ... concerned, we found that on the basis of information by the sales tax department regarding bogus suppliers and also keeping in view the reasons recorded by AO for reopening, we do not find any infirmity in the action of AO for reopening of the completed assessment. 11. From the record

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

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

ITA 7587/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

from various vendors, who were listed in the web site of sales tax department as hawala dealers by the Sales Tax Department. Copy of Reasons recorded for Re-opening of Assessment was also given to the assessee. During the year assessee had made purchases from bogus suppliers amounting to Rs.4 ... concerned, we found that on the basis of information by the sales tax department regarding bogus suppliers and also keeping in view the reasons recorded by AO for reopening, we do not find any infirmity in the action of AO for reopening of the completed assessment. 11. From the record

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

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

ITA 7586/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

from various vendors, who were listed in the web site of sales tax department as hawala dealers by the Sales Tax Department. Copy of Reasons recorded for Re-opening of Assessment was also given to the assessee. During the year assessee had made purchases from bogus suppliers amounting to Rs.4 ... concerned, we found that on the basis of information by the sales tax department regarding bogus suppliers and also keeping in view the reasons recorded by AO for reopening, we do not find any infirmity in the action of AO for reopening of the completed assessment. 11. From the record

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

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

ITA 7585/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

from various vendors, who were listed in the web site of sales tax department as hawala dealers by the Sales Tax Department. Copy of Reasons recorded for Re-opening of Assessment was also given to the assessee. During the year assessee had made purchases from bogus suppliers amounting to Rs.4 ... concerned, we found that on the basis of information by the sales tax department regarding bogus suppliers and also keeping in view the reasons recorded by AO for reopening, we do not find any infirmity in the action of AO for reopening of the completed assessment. 11. From the record

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

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

ITA 7584/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

from various vendors, who were listed in the web site of sales tax department as hawala dealers by the Sales Tax Department. Copy of Reasons recorded for Re-opening of Assessment was also given to the assessee. During the year assessee had made purchases from bogus suppliers amounting to Rs.4 ... concerned, we found that on the basis of information by the sales tax department regarding bogus suppliers and also keeping in view the reasons recorded by AO for reopening, we do not find any infirmity in the action of AO for reopening of the completed assessment. 11. From the record