← 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

Hemalatha Chervu, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward - 15(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1966/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1966/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Smt. Hemalatha Chervu Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 15 (1) Pan:Aodpc8304C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Akash Deshpande, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 06/11/2025, For The A.Y 2015-16. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Not Filed Her Return Of Income For The A.Y 2015-16. The Page 1 Of 11

For Appellant: Shri Akash Deshpande, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 69A

Hemalatha Chervu assessment has been reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the reasons recorded, as per which, income chargeable to tax has escaped the assessment and, accordingly, a notice under section 148 of the Act, dated, 6/4/2022 was issued and served on the assessee. However

Hi Tech Foods, Parwanoo vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Shimla

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 74/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.54/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.55/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.56/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.74/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.57/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.58/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Hi Tech Foods Ito Ward-1 बनाम/ Nh-22, Sector-6, Upmohal Parwanoo, Aaykar Bhawan-1 Vs. Sector-Vi, Solan (Hp) -173220 Shimla (Hp) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfh-7996-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Ld.AO. The assessee also filed copy of account as well a confirmation certificate from M/s Kamna Overseas. The assessee thus contended that the reasons recorded by the department were not sufficient to reopen the case of the assessee. 3.3 After rejecting aforesaid arguments, Ld. AO continued to make the allegations

Hi Tech Foods, Parwanoo vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Shimla

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 58/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.54/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.55/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.56/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.74/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.57/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.58/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Hi Tech Foods Ito Ward-1 बनाम/ Nh-22, Sector-6, Upmohal Parwanoo, Aaykar Bhawan-1 Vs. Sector-Vi, Solan (Hp) -173220 Shimla (Hp) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfh-7996-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Ld.AO. The assessee also filed copy of account as well a confirmation certificate from M/s Kamna Overseas. The assessee thus contended that the reasons recorded by the department were not sufficient to reopen the case of the assessee. 3.3 After rejecting aforesaid arguments, Ld. AO continued to make the allegations

Hi Tech Foods, Parwanoo vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Shimla

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 57/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.54/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.55/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.56/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.74/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.57/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.58/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Hi Tech Foods Ito Ward-1 बनाम/ Nh-22, Sector-6, Upmohal Parwanoo, Aaykar Bhawan-1 Vs. Sector-Vi, Solan (Hp) -173220 Shimla (Hp) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfh-7996-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Ld.AO. The assessee also filed copy of account as well a confirmation certificate from M/s Kamna Overseas. The assessee thus contended that the reasons recorded by the department were not sufficient to reopen the case of the assessee. 3.3 After rejecting aforesaid arguments, Ld. AO continued to make the allegations

Hi Tech Foods, Parwanoo vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Shimla

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 56/CHANDI/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.54/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.55/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.56/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.74/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.57/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.58/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Hi Tech Foods Ito Ward-1 बनाम/ Nh-22, Sector-6, Upmohal Parwanoo, Aaykar Bhawan-1 Vs. Sector-Vi, Solan (Hp) -173220 Shimla (Hp) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfh-7996-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Ld.AO. The assessee also filed copy of account as well a confirmation certificate from M/s Kamna Overseas. The assessee thus contended that the reasons recorded by the department were not sufficient to reopen the case of the assessee. 3.3 After rejecting aforesaid arguments, Ld. AO continued to make the allegations

Hi Tech Foods, Solan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Shimla

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 55/CHANDI/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.54/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.55/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.56/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.74/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.57/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.58/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Hi Tech Foods Ito Ward-1 बनाम/ Nh-22, Sector-6, Upmohal Parwanoo, Aaykar Bhawan-1 Vs. Sector-Vi, Solan (Hp) -173220 Shimla (Hp) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfh-7996-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Ld.AO. The assessee also filed copy of account as well a confirmation certificate from M/s Kamna Overseas. The assessee thus contended that the reasons recorded by the department were not sufficient to reopen the case of the assessee. 3.3 After rejecting aforesaid arguments, Ld. AO continued to make the allegations

Hi Tech Foods, Parwanoo vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Shimla

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 54/CHANDI/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.54/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.55/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.56/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.74/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.57/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.58/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Hi Tech Foods Ito Ward-1 बनाम/ Nh-22, Sector-6, Upmohal Parwanoo, Aaykar Bhawan-1 Vs. Sector-Vi, Solan (Hp) -173220 Shimla (Hp) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfh-7996-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Ld.AO. The assessee also filed copy of account as well a confirmation certificate from M/s Kamna Overseas. The assessee thus contended that the reasons recorded by the department were not sufficient to reopen the case of the assessee. 3.3 After rejecting aforesaid arguments, Ld. AO continued to make the allegations

Paranjyothi Thota, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2079/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

income for the A.Y 2012-13. The case has been, subsequently reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the reasons recorded as per which, income chargeable to tax has escaped the assessment and accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act dated 29/03/2019 was issued

Paranjyothi Thota, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2050/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

income for the A.Y 2012-13. The case has been, subsequently reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the reasons recorded as per which, income chargeable to tax has escaped the assessment and accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act dated 29/03/2019 was issued